Case Study

A CASE STUDY OF PARENTAL STYLES, PARENTING PRACTICES, STUDENT
SELF-CONCEPT, ACADEMIC SELF-CONCEPT, ANGER CONTROL, AND

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN A SUBURBAN MIDDLE SCHOOL
A Dissertation submitted by
Mark Anthony Pitterson
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

of Doctor of Education at Dowling College, School of Education,
Department of Educational Administration, Leadership and Technology
Dowling College
Brookhaven, New York
2010
UMI Number: 3428923
All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
Dissertation Publishing
UMI 3428923
Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC.

All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
uest
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
This Dissertation Submitted by Mark Pitterson
For the Degree of Doctor of Education

Is approved
Robert J. Manley, Ph.D

Chair
Elsa-Sofia Morte, Ed.D.
Design Specialist
Roberta Gerold, Ed.D.

Outside Reader
Stephanie Tatum, Ph.D.

Reader
Richard Bernato, Ed.D.

Committee Member
Dowling College
Brookhaven, New York
2010
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to examine parents' perceptions of their schoolrelated parenting practices, their parental style, and children's dispositions, and the
relationship of these variables to their students' achievement level on their New York
State eighth-grade mathematics assessment examination. Students in this study took the
eighth-grade mathematics examination in March 2008 in a suburban Long Island middle

school. Parents' school-related parenting practices were derived from the work of
Epstein. The school-related parenting practices used in this research were Parenting,
Volunteering, Learning at Home and School Participation. The parental styles used in this
research were based on the works of Baumrind: Permissive, Authoritative and
Authoritarian and Non-Coercive based on the work of Gerald. Students' dispositions

were Self-Concept and Academic Self-Concept based on the work of Marsh and O'Neil,
and Anger Control based on the work of Rusielewicz.
The subjects of this research were parents and their children who took the 2008
eighth-grade mathematics examination and received either Level 3 (proficiency) or Level
4 (Mastery). Thirty-four of 70 parents and their 34 children took part in this research.
The research methodology was quantitative. Parents' perceived school-related
parenting practices and parental styles were determined by administering a parent survey.
The students' dispositions were determined by administering a student survey. Analyses
of the parents' and students' responses were conducted using descriptive statistics, t-tests,
and correlations.
Parents identified their school related parenting practices in descending order as

Learning at Home, School Participation, Parenting and Volunteering. Most parents
identified their parental style as Authoritarian. There was no difference in boys and girls
in the three student dispositions. The only Parenting practice that showed a
correlation with student achievement on the mathematics examination was Parenting,
which had a positive effect on students who achieved Level 3. The only student
disposition that showed any statistical significance was Academic Self-Concept.
DEDICATION
This study is dedicated to all the members of my family: To my grandmother,

Eliza Green, who was always very supportive, in every way, of my going to college from
when I started this journey back in 1984 at Mico Teachers' College in Kingston, Jamaica.
To my siblings, Verona, Karen, Michelle and posthumously to Dwight and
Angella who both passed away in 2005 - one month after I began my doctoral studies this research is for all of you who never had the time or opportunity to attend college. My
brother, Errol, you have always been my role model and mentor.
My children: Mark, Jr., Tatyana; and especially for you Jovani thanks for being so
understanding of my frequent absence from your lives during my studies or simply for
the absence from your life I hope the day will come when you will not just understand
but forgive me. I love you dearly.
My darling, Tecia, you brought stability and joy to my life. Thanks for being there
for me all the way.
Here I give a special dedication to my dearly departed mother Carmen Madge
Pitterson. I am sorry you are not here in person to celebrate this milestone with me but I
am certain you were watching over me during this process. I immortalize you here.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There were many people who assisted me in various ways to accomplish this
achievement. I wish to personally thank all the professors at Dowling College with whom
I had a class or two during this process. I want to also give a special thanks to the patient
members of my committee: Dr. Manley, Dr. Tatum, Dr. Bernato, my outside reader
Dr. Gerold for volunteering her support to me in this endeavor, and especially to
Dr. Morte for her kind demeanor and accessibility throughout some of the most
challenging times.
I wish to acknowledge everyone else who kept inspiring me to complete this
dissertation, from my colleagues at work to my Dowling sisters Idalia Velasquez and
Korto Scott. Thank you all.
Vil
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOFTABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER I -INTRODUCTION
vi
vii
?
xiv
1
Introduction
Purpose of the Study
Statement of the Problem
Research Questions
Research Question One
Research Question Two
Research Question Three
Research Question Four
Research Question Five
Permissive Parental Styles
10
Authoritarian Parental Styles
10
Authoritative Parental Styles
10
Non-Coercive Style
11
Parenting Practices
11
Learning at Home
12
Volunteering in Schools
12
viii
School Participation
13
Student Dispositions
13
Self-Concept
13
Academic Self-Concept
14
Anger Control
14
Conceptual Rationale
14
Limitations of the Study
19
CHAPTER II- REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH
21
Introduction
21
An Explanation of Parental Styles
21
School-Related Parenting Practices
29
Summary of Research Literature
38
Research Question Six
40
CHAPTER III - RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
41
Introduction
41
Setting
43
Data Gathering Techniques
44
Survey Questionnaire One
45
Instrument or Survey Questionnaire Two
48
Data Collection Procedures
54
Data Analysis
55
CHAPTER IV - DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
58
Introduction
58
62
ix
67
73
77
82
1 12
Summary
116
CHAPTERV- SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
121
Introduction
121
Summary
121
Recommendations
140
Recommendations for Further Research
141
REFERENCES
143
APPENDIX A - PARENT PERMISSION TO CONDUCT STUDENT SURVEY
151
APPENDIX B - STUDENT ASSENT FORM FOR STUDY PARTICIPATION
153
APPENDIX C - REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SURVEY
155
APPENDIX D - PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SURVEY
156
APPENDIX E - INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL
157
APPENDIX F - PARENT SURVEY
158
APPENDIX G - STUDENT SURVEY
162
APPENDIX H - SURVEY DATA
164
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 3.1
Components Matrix for Parents' Questionnaire
47
TABLE 3.2
Deleted Items from Parent Survey Instrument
48
TABLE 3 .3
Components Matrix of Students' Questionnaire
49
TABLE 3.4
Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition:
Self-Concept
TABLE 3.5
Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition: Academic
Self-Concept
TABLE 3.6
50
50
Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition: Anger

Control
51
TABLE 3.7
Deleted Items from Student Survey Instrument
51
TABLE 3.8
Newly Defined Dimensions of Student Questionnaire
52
TABLE 3 .9
Scale Reliabilities for Parents' Questionnaire
52
TABLE 3.10 Scale Reliability for Students' Questionnaire
53
TABLE 4.1
Student Gender Breakdown
61
TABLE 4.2
Students' Mathematics Achievement Levels
61
TABLE 4.3
Frequency Table for Parental Styles
62
TABLE 4.4
Frequency Analysis for Permissive Parental Style
63
TABLE 4.5
65
TABLE 4.6
Frequency Analysis for Authoritative Parental Style
66
TABLE 4.7
Frequency Analysis for Authoritarian Parental Style
68
TABLE 4.8
Frequency Chart for Four School-Related Parenting Practices
69
TABLE 4.9
Frequency Analysis for Volunteering
70
TABLE 4. 1 0 Frequency Analysis for Learning at Home
71
TABLE 4. 1 1 Frequency Analysis for School Participation
72
Xl
TABLE 4.12 Independent Sample f-test Results Comparing Students'

Reports by Gender and Students' Dispositions of
Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control
74
TABLE 4.13 Item Analysis for Self-Concept
75
TABLE 4. 14 Item Analysis for Academic Self-Concept
75
TABLE 4. 1 5 Item Analysis for Anger Control
76
TABLE 4.16 Independent Sample Mest Results Comparing Reports of Parental

Styles, School Related Parenting Practices, Students' Dispositions
of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control; and
Performance Level on Mathematics Examinations
78
TABLE 4.17.1 Split Files for Achievement Groupings and Students' Performance
Levels Based on the Dimensions of Parenting Level 3
79
Levels Based on the Dimensions of Parenting Level 4
80
TABLE 4. 1 8. 1 Split Files for Achievement Groupings and Students' Performance

Levels Based on the Dimensions of Learning at Home Level 3
80
Levels Based on the Dimensions of Learning at Home Level 4
80
Levels Based on the Dimensions of Authoritative Parental Style
Level 3
81
Levels Based on the Dimensions of Authoritative Parental Style
Level 4
81
TABLE 4.20 Correlation Matrix for Parental Styles, Parenting Practices, Student
Dispositions, and Proficiency Level on Mathematics Examinations
83
TABLE 4.21 Correlation Chart for Parenting and Mathematics
84
TABLE 4.22 Correlation Chart Parenting and Volunteering
85
TABLE 4.23 Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the School Related
Parenting Practice of Volunteering and the School Related
Parenting Practice of Parenting
86
XIl
TABLE 4.24 Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Learning at Home

and Parenting
87
TABLE 4.25 Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the School-Related
Parenting Practice of Learning at Home and the School Related

Parenting Practice of Parenting
88
TABLE 4.26 Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Parenting and Permissive
Parental Style
89
TABLE 4.27 Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the Parental Style
Permissive and the School-Related Parenting Practice of Parenting
90
TABLE 4.28 Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Parenting and Authoritative
Parental Style
92
TABLE 4.29 Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the Parental Style of
Authoritative and the School Related Parenting Practice of Parenting
93
TABLE 4.30 Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Volunteering and School
Participation
94
Parenting Practice of Volunteering and the School Related

Parenting Practice of School Participation
95
TABLE 4.32 Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Volunteering and Learning at
Home Participation
96
Parenting Practice of Learning at Home, and the School-Related

Parenting Practice of Volunteering
97
TABLE 4.34 Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of School Participation and
Learning at Home
99
Parenting Practice of Learning at Home and the School-Related

Parenting Practice of School Participation
100
TABLE 4.36 Correlation Chart for the School-Related Parenting Practice
Learning at Home and Parental Style Authoritarian
101
Parenting Practice of Learning at Home and Authoritarian

Parental Style
102
xiii
TABLE 4.38 Correlation Chart for the School-Related Parenting Practice Learning
at Home and Parental Style Permissive
1 03
Permissive and the School-Related Parenting Practice of Learning
at Home
104
at Home and Parental Style Authoritative
106
Authoritative and the School-Related Parenting Practice of Learning
at Home
107
at Home and the Students' Disposition of Academic Self-Concept
1 08
Parenting Practice of Learning at Home and the Students' Disposition

of Academic Self-Concept
1 09
TABLE 4.44 Descriptive Statistics for School-Related Parenting Practices: Parenting,

Volunteering, School Participation, Learning at Home and Authoritative
Parental Style
113
TABLE 4.45 Correlations of School-Related Parenting Practices and of Parenting,
Volunteering, School Participation and Learning at Home and the

Authoritative Parental Style
113
TABLE 4.46 Correlation Chart for Authoritative Parental Style and School-Related
Parenting Practices With Learning at Home Controlled
114
TABLE 4.47 Correlation Matrix for Individual Items in the School-Related Parenting
Practice of School Participation and the Authoritative Parental Style. ...115
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 . 1 Epstein's Theories of Overlapping Spheres of Influence . . .

FIGURE 1 .2 Pictorial Representation of Research Hypothesis
FIGURE 3.11 Modified Pictorial Representation of Research Hypothesis
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Baumrind (1966, 1989, 1991) conducted extensive research on the role of the
authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parental styles in European-American
families. Baumrind (1966) described the authoritarian parent as a parent who tries to
"shape, control, and evaluate the behavior and attitude of the child" (p. 261). The
permissive parent was described as "non-punitive" (p. 256). The authoritative parent
"encourages verbal give and take and shares with the child the reasoning behind her
policy" (p. 260). Darling and Steinberg (1993) and Rothstein (2004) agreed that there
was a correlation between parental style and school-related parenting practice. Rothstein
(2004) believed that "All parents want their children to succeed in school but that some
parents are far more successful than others in promoting their children's academic
success" (p. 134). Darling and Steinberg (1993) made the point that the parent's influence
over the child was directly related to the parent-child interaction and dictated the impact
of parenting practice such as parent-school involvement.
Epstein (1995) and Epstein, Sanders, Simon, Salinas, Jansorn, and VanVoorhis
(2002) proposed the theory of overlapping spheres (the family, the school, and the
community) and the influence of each sphere on student academic achievement. Each
sphere represents the means by which students learn. In an ideal setting, the elements of
the sphere would overlap creating a symbiotic relationship through which students learn.
This relationship could also become strained. Students learn within a sphere and their
learning can be independent or collaborative (Epstein, et al., 2002). Epstein (1995)
believed that more influence over student achievement would be derived if schools were
more family-like, and families were more school-like. Family-like schools would be
more open and accessible to all members of the community. School-like families would
see all children as students and share the school's educational ideals as well as promote
educational achievement goals and practices.
While parental styles and parenting practices influence student achievement, they
are not the only source of influence. Shavelson, Hubner and Stanton (1976) made the
case that both academic self-concept and self-concept help to predict the level of student
academic achievement. They depicted self-concept as a pyramid comprised of both
academic and non-academic self-concept at its base and a more generalized self-concept
at the apex. According to Calsyn and Kenny (1977), there is a direct link between
academic self-concept and academic achievement: academic achievement predicts
academic self-confidence. Shavelson and Bolus (1982) identified academic self-concept
as a predictor of academic achievement. Both academic self-concept and academic

achievement are reciprocal predictors (Liu & Kaplan, 1992; Marsh & Yeung, 1997).
Gerald (2007) studied the relationship between school-related parenting practices
and parental styles, and student academic achievement. The conclusion was that there
was a significant positive correlation between the authoritative parental style and student
achievement on the fourth-grade English Language Arts (ELA) examinations in New
York State in the years 2004 and 2005. The other parental styles did not result in any
significant student achievement. Gerald's (2007) findings that the authoritative parental
style accounts for greater student achievement levels while permissive and authoritarian
parental styles result in lower student grades are supported by research conducted by
Dornbusch, Ritter Leiderman, Roberts and Faleigh (1987). Darling and Steinberg (1993)
concluded that the most consistent predictor of student academic achievement throughout
the child's school years is authoritative parenting style.
Chavkin and Williams (1985) identified learning at home and volunteering as
significant parenting practices in promoting positive student achievement. However,
Chavkin and Williams (1985) reported that parents are more comfortable playing the
traditional roles: helping students with home work, attending meet the teachers' night,
and being a member of the audience at a school sponsored activity. By examining student
performance on the New York State's fourth-grade ELA examinations in 2004 and 2005
and parents' responses on a survey questionnaire, Gerald (2007) arrived at the same
conclusion as did Chavkin and Williams (1985) that Learning at Home and Volunteering
are significant parenting practices in promoting positive student achievement.
According to Mackenzie (1983) literature reviews on effective schools agreed that
school culture and climate are integral to academic success. A study of students'
academic achievement must include the culture of the school. Purkey and Smith (1983),
in reviewing effective schools, found that there was a close positive correlation between
positive school culture and academic quality. Pritchard, R., Morrow, D. and Marshall, J.
(2005) reported that the culture of the school district directly influences the culture of the
school and in turn affects students' achievement level. Schein (1985) defined school
culture as a body of solutions that have been formulated over time and represent the
"correct way to perceive, think about and feel" (page) about both internal and external
forces in a school. School culture at its simplest empirical form is best described as the
way things are done in the school (Glover & Law, 2004).
The relevance of culture in the context of the school environment is best summed
up with a quote: "Organizational systems credit the role of positive culture in developing
effective systems" (Deming, 1986). A positive school culture contributes to the overall
effectiveness of the school and the level of student achievement in that school (Purkey &
Smith, 1983). Positive school culture embraces four principles: 1. respect and trust in
teachers and students, 2. a sense of belonging, 3. support for adult and student learning,
and 4. a collaborative working and learning environment (Leithwood, Aitken, & Jantzi,
2001). These aspects of culture were given much credence in this study of student
achievement and especially with regards to parenting practices.
The operational definition of student disposition is comprised of three criteria:
1. self-concept, 2. academic self-concept, and 3. anger control. Hamachek (1995)
identified self-concept as a major determinant of student achievement. Positive selfconcept will yield positive student academic achievement. "Students with high selfconcept tend to approach school-related tasks with confidence, and success on those tasks
reinforces this confidence" (Hamachek, 1995, p. 420). Hamachek also reported that
students with low academic self-concept will display poor academic achievement. Maser
(2007) reported that a reliable measure of student academic achievement is their
academic self-concept. Students with high academic self-concept displayed higher levels
of academic achievement than do students with low academic self-concept. Academic
self-concept was the strongest predictor of student academic achievement. Calsyn and
Kenny (1977) also linked academic achievement to self-concept. Skaalvik and Hagtvet
(1990), Hamachek (1995), and Guay, Marsh and Boivin (2003) all aligned academic selfconcept to student achievement. Students who were confident in their academic prowess
tended to be more successful academically than students who were less confident about
their academic abilities.
Tamaki (1994) reported that an inordinate amount of the classroom teacher's time
was consumed by attendance to problem behaviors. Maser (2007) also concluded that
high academic self-concept is associated with low problem behaviors. High problem
behaviors, which included behavior such as poor anger control, resulted in low student
academic achievement. Anderson (1978) defined anger as "a temporary emotional state
caused by frustration" (page). Skiba and Mckelvey (2000) viewed anger as one of the
major factors in the causation of school violence. Rusielewicz (2005) reported that
students, who were at risk of academic failure in a Reconnecting Youth program,
including students who had difficulty with anger control, did not improve their academic
performance. Students with anger control problems recorded lower scores on their post
test after completing the Reconnecting Youth program. The program did not improve the
anger control issues that the students in the treatment group reported. Students reported
that they performed worse on anger control behaviors than students in the non-treatment
group. Englemann (1999) concluded that there was a positive correlation between low
academic achievement and delinquent behavior such as anger control. In order to raise
student academic achievement levels, it is imperative that the students are able to control
their anger. Both Rusielewicz (2005) and Englemann (1999) stated that students' ability
to control their anger is a vital link to their achievement level. Rusielewicz' s (2005) study
of the Reconnecting Youth program indicated that a single year of emphasis on
addressing students' anger control maybe an insufficient approach to help students
improve their personal discipline and their academic achievement levels.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among parental
styles, parenting practices, student attitude of self-concept, academic self-concept, anger
control, and student achievement in a suburban middle school on Long Island, New York.
The study was based on Epstein and Dauber's (1991) parenting practices: Parenting,
Volunteering, Learning at Home, Communicating, Decision Making and Collaborating
with Community, and a seventh parenting practice developed by Gerald (2007) - School
Participation. The focus of this research was on the four parenting practices that
accounted for the greatest variance in a study conducted by Gerald (2007): Parenting,
Volunteering, Learning at Home and School Participation.
This study also examined Baumrind's (1966) parental styles: Authoritarian,
Permissive, and Authoritative. A fourth parental style: Non-Coercive, developed by
Gerald (2007), was examined. In addition, the study examined the relationship of
students' dispositions of self-concept, academic self-conflict, and anger control to
students' academic achievement. An examination of the differences in student
dispositions of self-concept, academic self-conflict, and anger control was conducted in

this study based on student gender.
The original focus of this study was on parents whose children scored at Levels 1
and 2 contrasted with parents whose children scored at Level 3 (proficiency) and Level 4
(mastery) on the eighth-grade mathematics examination of 2008. One hundred parents'
surveys were mailed home to parents. Included in the parents' survey envelope were
copies of the students' survey and parents' permission to survey their children. An
explanation of participants' rights and risk involved in participating in the survey was
also included in the parents' survey packet. A self-addressed stamped envelope was
included with the survey to encourage the completion and return of the surveys. Only 19
completed parents' surveys were returned of the 100 sent. A second mailing of 81
surveys followed up with telephone calls was completed. After two mailings totaling 1 8 1
surveys, only 34 parents responded and gave permission for their children to be surveyed.
This was 34 percent of the eighth-grade students who participated in the mathematics
examination in March 2008. All the surveys received were from parents whose children
scored at Levels 3 or 4 (proficiency and mastery levels respectively). This accounted for
48.6 percent of the 70 students who received Levels 3 or 4 on their mathematics

examinations in 2008 in this suburban Long Island school. The 34 survey responses were
sufficient to contrast parents and students in Levels 3 and 4. The student surveys were
conducted at their school with their parent's agreement, and with the cooperation of their
principal.
Statement of the Problem
How do parental styles, parenting practices, student dispositions of self-concept,

academic self-concept and anger control relate to student achievement level based on the
New York State's eighth-grade examination in mathematics? This study compared the
parental styles and parenting practices of parents of boys and girls in grade 8 and their
mathematics New York State proficiency scores. Achievement levels for this study,
based on New York State achievement level profile, were Levels 3 and 4. Student
proclivity toward the dispositions of self-concept, academic self-concept, and anger

control was measured by their responses to questions based on a survey questionnaire
administered at the school. Student self-concept, academic self-concept and anger control
scores were matched with parents' responses on a survey of parental styles and school
related parenting practices for students in Levels 3 and 4.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study.
How do parents of eighth grade students describe their parental styles in four
categories: Permissive, Authoritative, Authoritarian and Non-Coercive?
How do parents of eighth-grade students describe their school related practices in
four categories: Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, and School Participation?
Do eighth-grade boys' and girls' dispositions of self-concept, academic selfconcept and anger control differ?
How do parents of male and female eighth-grade students differ in their schoolrelated parenting practices of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home and School
Participation; their parental styles of Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian; and

students' groupings in Level 3 and 4 in mathematics?
What relationships exist among parenting practices of Parenting, School
Participation, Learning at Home and Volunteering; Students' dispositions of Self

Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control; and parental styles of
Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student proficiency level on the eighth-
grade mathematics examinations in 2007-2008 school year?

Definition ofMajor Variables and Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms will be used throughout this
document: participants, student achievement, attitude, parental style, parent, parenting

practice, and student disposition.
Participants
Participants in this study referred to parents of eighth-grade students who

demonstrated proficiency (Level 3) or mastery (Level 4) on their mathematics assessment
examination and their children who participated in the New York State 2008 eighth-grade
mathematics examination and received either Level 3 or Level 4. Students' mathematics
examination achievement levels on the New York State grade 8 math assessment
examinations was utilized to identify students' academic level.
Student Achievement
For the purpose of this study, students were categorized into two groups
representing their achievement level based on their performance on the grade 8
mathematics assessments. Based on New York State achievement level profile, students
who received Levels 3 and 4 met and exceeded the State's standards respectively.
Students who received Level 3 were referred to as proficient. Students who received
Level 4 were referred to as mastery. "Level 3: student meets the standard and with
continued steady growth, should pass the Regents examinations; Level 4: student exceeds
the standards and is moving toward high performance on the Regents examinations."
(New York State Department of Education, 2004, p.5). Survey questionnaires were
administered to the parents of participating proficient students and one to the students.
Parental Styles
Becker (1994) defined parental style as a major influence in the manner in

which parents try to control their adolescents. Baumrind (1991) identified three
10
types of parental styles: Permissive, Authoritarian, and Authoritative. Gerald

(2007) identified one other parental style: Non-Coercive.
Permissive Parental Styles:
The permissive parent is non-punitive and is accepting and supportive of the

child's impulses, desires, and actions. Decisions are usually made in consultation with the
child. Few demands are made of the child by the permissive parent including demands
for household responsibility and orderly behavior. The parent sees himself or herself as a
resource to be used by the child as the child wishes. The child is allowed to regulate his
or her activities as much as possible. The permissive parent attempts to reason and give
explanations for family rules, but will not resort to the use of force to accomplish tasks
(Baumrind, 1966).
Authoritarian Parental Styles:
The authoritarian parent uses a pre-established set of immutable standards of

conduct based on religious precepts. Value is placed on virtue and forceful, punitive
measures are favored to curb the child's self-will whenever the child's actions conflict
with the parent's value of right and wrong. There is no room for negotiation between the
parent and the child. The parent's word is law. Respect for work is taught through
household responsibilities (Baumrind, 1966).
Authoritative Parental Styles:
Parents attempt to direct their child's activities but in a rational manner. Decisions
are made with the child's input. Verbal negotiations are encouraged and the logic behind
parents' policies is explained. Objections to conformity are solicited by the parent.
Respect is given to the child's individuality and interests, but the parent's adult
perspective always supersedes the child's interests. The authoritative parent
11
acknowledges and affirms the child's present qualities while setting standards of future
expectations. Disciplinary measures are supportive rather than punitive (Baumrind,
1966).
Non-Coercive Style:
Non-coercive parents do not believe in dominating their children nor do they

exercise power over their children. These parents see very little value in assigning their
children a regiment of chores. Consequently, no demand is placed on the child to do
chores. The non-coercive parent has little or no regard for the child's opinion or inquiry
(Gerald, 2007).
Parent
Epstein (1995) defined parenting as being responsible for the health and safety,
supervision, discipline, guidance, rule setting, punishment, setting of curfew, and the
provision of a home environment that is conducive to the child's educational achievement
and appropriate behavior at each level. Ergo, the parent is "The adult with the
responsibility for financial and emotional care and support of a school-aged child"
(Unkenholz, 2007, p. 8).
Parenting Practices
Stemming from her definition of parenting, Epstein (1995) identified six basic
measures of parental involvement: obligation for health and safety; obligation for homeschool communication; volunteering in school; provision of a learning environment at
home; involvement in school decision making; and involvement in school and
community collaboration. For the purpose of this study, three of Epstein's main factors Parenting, Learning at Home and Volunteering in Schools - associated with student
achievement and a fourth factor - School Participation - created by Gerald (2007) were
12
explored. According to Gerald (2007) these are the four main factors that account for the
greatest variance in parenting practices aiid student achievement. These four schoolrelated parenting practices were employed in this study. A distinction between Epstein's
Volunteering in School and Gerald's School Participation was elucidated.
Parenting
Epstein (1995) defined parenting as being responsible for the health and safety,
supervision, discipline, guidance, rule setting, punishment, setting of curfew, and the
provision of a home environment that is conducive to the child's educational achievement
and appropriate behavior at each grade level. Parents are obligated to provide for the
well-being of their children. Parenting is the application of proper child-rearing skills that
promote attention to the child's health and safety needs. This includes the provision of
adequate supervision, attention to discipline, the provision of a home environment
conducive to the school-aged child's academic achievement, establishment of rules to
guide the child in making responsible decision, and the provision of punishment to
promote age appropriate behaviors (Epstein, 1995).
Learning at Home
Parent involvement in learning activities at home such as rendering assistance,
either parent-initiated or child-initiated request for assistance, in homework or class work

is Epstein's (1995) definition of learning at home.
Volunteering in Schools
The definition of volunteering is parent involvement in assisting teachers,
administrators, and children. Volunteering also encompasses the parent's attendance at
school sponsored activities such as assemblies, field trips, and fund raisers as a show of
13
support for the child. Volunteering in school is primarily done as a means of rendering
supervisory assistance (Epstein, 1995).
Gerald (2007) defined school participation as parents' attendance and active

involvement in workshops, conferences, and assemblies conducted by the school. School
participation also includes after-school activities conducted by the school such as field
trips, and fundraising activities such as school governance and advocacy, involvement in
decision-making roles in the decision making PTA/PTO, Advisory Councils; other
committees or groups at the school, districts, or state level and parents' and community
activities in independent advocacy groups that monitor schools and work for school
improvement as school participation. School participation encompasses both volunteering
for supervisory assistance and being involved in the planning and implementation levels
of the school's decision making.
Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996) defined disposition as an individuals' view or attitude
toward something. The operational definition of student dispositions is student selfconcept, academic self-concept, and anger control.
Self-Concept
Self-Concept is the opinion that a student formulates of him or herself. This

opinion is formed through the environmental experiences that the student encounters.
This opinion is usually reinforced by individuals or the environment (Shavelson et al
1976). Self-Concepts manifest themselves in psychological well being and general
confidence (Hamachek, 1995). The operational definition of Self-Concept, for the
purpose of this study, was comprised of the following characteristics: having confidence
14
and respect for one's self, having positive feelings about one's self, being in a good
mood, being accepting of one's self, doing things that the student considered important
and having positive feelings about one's self.
Shavelson et al. (1976), Marsh and O'Neil (1984), and Maser (2007) defined
academic self-concept as a student's perception of his or her academic abilities,

performance and achievement. This perception is usually the result of environmental
reinforcements. The operational definition of Academic Self-Concept, for the purpose of
this study, was comprised of the following characteristics: having a love for most
academic subjects, not experiencing difficulties with academic subjects and receiving
good grades in academic subjects in school.
Anger Control
Anger Control, as defined by the American Psychological Association (2004) and
Rusielewicz (2005), is the use of self-management and self-control strategies to reduce
both emotional and psychological behaviors in an effort to promote constructive
behavior. The operational definition of Anger Control, for the purpose of this study, was
comprised of the following characteristics: displaying little or no anger, not quick to

engage in a fight, having the ability to control one's temper, and was never easily
angered.
Conceptual Rationale
Student academic achievement is predicated on a number of contributing factors
as explained by the major theorists of this study: Baumrind, 1991, Gerald, 2007; Epstein,
2001; Darling and Steinberg, 1993; Unkenholz, 2007; Rusielewicz, 2005; and Maser,
2007. Baumrind (1966, 1989, and 1991), Darling and Steinberg (1993), and Gerald
15
(2007) studied the relationship between parental styles and student academic
achievement; Epstein (1991, 1995) and Unkenholz (2007) studied parenting practices.
Rusielewicz (2005) and Maser (2007) concentrated their studies on student dispositions.
This study aimed to examine other student generated contributing factors, in concert with
the established achievement variables, which may influence the level of student academic
achievement.
Baumrind (1966) identified three distinct parental styles: Authoritarian,

Authoritative and Permissive. Parents who are authoritarian are more demanding and
have immutable standards of expectations and discipline for their children. These
standards are usually based on pre-established precepts that are usually based on religious
beliefs (Baumrind, 1966). Baumrind (1966) described the Authoritative parent as one
who negotiates with the child in establishing expectations. These expectations are not
mutable, but once established, through give and take, are enforced. The Permissive parent
does not establish boundaries. The Permissive parent seeks input from the child in all
decisions and is "non-punitive and acceptant" (Baumrind, 1966, p. 256). Gerald (2007)
identified Non-coercive as a fourth type of parental style. "The Non-Coercive parent does
not agree with exercising power over children. She does not require children to keep a
regiment or a schedule of chores. She also has little regards for her child's inquiry or
opinions" (p. 155).
Darling and Steinberg (1993) concluded that parent involvement in their

children's education is directly related to their parental style. Parent involvement in their
children's education has been credited with producing greater student achievement.
Students whose parents are involved in the schools experience less retention, have lower
special education referrals, have higher mathematics and reading scores, and have higher
16
graduation rates (Swap, 1987). Swap (1987) reported that parent involvement is also
beneficial to teachers because as parents become more familiar with the classroom and
the academic activities, they become more supportive of the teachers and show more
respect for the teachers as professionals.
Chavkin and Williams (1987) believed the role of parents and teachers in the
classroom are equally important, albeit separate, in promoting student achievement.
However, parents have not always been made to feel welcomed in the school systems.
This is in spite of the parents' continual involvement in their children's education.

Figure 1.1 Epstein's Theories of Overlapping Spheres of Influence of Family, School and
Community on Children's Learning (External Structure of Theoretical Model) Epstein et
al., 2002, p. 163.
Force C
Force B
Experience,
Philosophy,
Experience,
Philosophy,
Practices of
FAMILY
SCHOO
Practices of
School
Family
Force D
Experience
Philosophy,
Practices of
COMMUNfTY
Community
Force A
Time/Age/Grade level
Epstein's theories of overlapping spheres of influence (Epstein, 1995; Epstein et

al 2002) examined the relationships of the three main educational institutions in a
student's life: family, school and community. While these institutions mostly operate
17
independently of each other, more influence over the student is derived from their
working together as partners. Epstein (1995) identified six parenting practices that
promote greater parental involvement in children's education: Parenting,
Communication, Volunteering, Learning at Home, Decision Making, and Collaborating
with the Community. "Partners recognize their shared interests in and responsibilities for
children, and they work together to create better programs and opportunities for students"
(Epstein, 1995, p. 701). Gerald (2007) identified a seventh parenting practice: School
Participation.
Authoritarian
Learning
At Home
Permissive
D=T
?
Parental
Styles
Non-
Coercive ->
\M
Students'
Academic
Achievement
Parenting
W
Practices
School
Participation
Parenting
Authoritative
Students'
Dispositions
t
Anger
at School
-z^
-------F
Control
Volunteering
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Figure 1.2. Pictorial Representation of Research Hypothesis
18
Unkenholz (2007) examined the differences in perceptions on five of Epstein's

(1995) six parenting practices. The study was conducted on parents of minority and nonminority children based on student academic achievement levels. Through this
examination, Unkenholz determined that Learning at Home is the best predictor of
student achievement level regardless of student ethnicity.
An investigation of student disposition of anger control is included in this because
of Rusielewicz's (2005) study of the relationship of student disposition of Anger Control
to student academic achievement by gender. In his study, Rusielewicz (2005) made the
case for a study of student anger control because students' lack of adequate anger control
leads to behavioral problems, which in turn leads to suspension from school. Students
who are suspended from school, according to Rusielewicz (2005), lose instructional time
and are prone to falling behind academically. The students in this study are all students
who have achieved academic proficiency and mastery and do not epitomize students who
have anger control problems. This study, therefore, also served to test Rusielewicz's
(2005) hypothesis. In Rusielewicz's (2005) study, both males and females reported that
the Reconnecting Youth Program (RY) helped them to "improve their intrapersonal and
interpersonal skills, which in turn, helped to reduce conflict with themselves and with
others" (p. 102). While students' level of Anger Control did not display any difference
from the students in the non-treatment group, the students reported that the RY Program
helped them at school and in the community.
Maser (2007) studied student dispositions of Self-Concept and Academic SelfConcept and found a positive correlation to student academic achievement level.
This study tried to codify the body of knowledge on student achievement as
reported by the aforementioned researchers. In particular, this study examined the
19
relationship of student dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger

Control; Parental Styles; and School-Related Parenting Practices (Figure 1 .T) to student
achievement level by gender on the New York State grade 8 mathematics standardized
examinations. The hypothesis of this study, as depicted pictorially by Figure 1 .2, is that
Student Achievement levels are dependent on parental styles: Authoritarian,
Authoritative, Permissive, and Non-Coercive; Parental Practices: Learning at Home,
Volunteering at School, School Participation and Parenting; and Student Dispositions:

Anger Control, Self-Concept, and Academic Self-Concept.
Significance of the Study
The study might serve to inform policy makers in school districts about
relationships among parental styles and parenting practices, student dispositions of selfconcept, academic self-concept, and anger control and student academic performance.
The study might also guide the implementation of policies and practices governing
student achievement based on students' gender in order to raise middle school student
academic achievement to the level of proficiency or mastery.
Limitations of the Study
The subjects in this study were limited to one middle school in a suburban Long
Island, New York school district. The demographics of the student population might not
be representative of the demographic make up of other schools in the geographic location

selected nor could it be used to represent middle school students nationally. Additionally,
this study did not take into account the socio-economic status of the parents of the
students being selected. Student proclivity towards other behaviors such as drug abuse,
sexual activities, theft and violence were not included as aspects of student dispositions
for this study. The study was limited to the attitudes of the parents who were purposefully
20
selected based on their child's achievement on the eighth grade mathematics standardized
test. Only students who demonstrated mathematics proficiency (Level 3) and mastery
(Level 4) were selected for this study. Finally, this study was limited to students who
were not English language learners during the 2007-2008 school year.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH

Introduction
Two of the most preeminent theorists on parenting are Baumrind (1966, 1972,
1989, 1991) and Epstein (1995, 1991); both of whom have investigated extensively the
topic of parental styles and school related parenting practices. Baumrind investigated
parental styles and Epstein investigated parent involvement in school. This research
discussed parental styles from the global perspective such as that described by Darling
and Steinberg (1993); who stated that the global perspective is "a constellation of
attitudes towards the child that are communicated to the child and create an emotional
climate in which the parent's behaviors are expressed" (p. 493).

The review of literature was divided into three main parts: explanation of parental
styles, school-related parenting practices, and student dispositions of self-concept,

academic self-concept, and anger control. Each of these divisions was further subdivided
into their respective components.
An Explanation of Parental Styles

Early researchers Symonds (1939), Baldwin (1948), and Schaefer (1959) grappled
with the concept of parental styles and being able to agree on a universal set of concepts
in determining parental styles. Symonds (1939) proposed concepts like acceptance and
rejection as determinants. Baldwin (1948) theorized concepts like emotional warmth and
hostility, and detachment and involvement. Schaefer (1959) further proposed the
22
concepts of love and hostility, and autonomy and control as determinants of parental
styles. Schaefer (1959) also made the point that the inability of researchers to adopt a
single set of concepts as determinants of parental styles is the result of the researchers'
focus. Researchers are usually more inclined to focus on the connection between parental
attitudes and the parent's observable behavior (Shaefer, 1959).
Like Symonds (1939), Baldwin (1948), and Schaefer (1959), Baumrind (1966)
studied the methods by which parents control their children. However, "control" as
viewed by Baumrind (1966) is a neutral concept. It refers to the parents' methodology of
getting their children socialized and integrated into society. Parental control for Baumrind
(1966) was integral in determining accurate concepts of parental styles. A focus on
parental control of students separated Baumrind (1966) from Symonds (1939), Baldwin
(1948) and Schaefer (1959). Baumrind's (1966) codification of three typologies of
parental styles - Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive - was born from her
concept of parental control.
The type of parenting style employed can influence student academic

achievement. Dornbusch et al (1987) concluded that students whose parents are
authoritarian in their style of parenting do not perform academically as well as their
peers. "The authoritarian parent attempts to shape, control, and evaluate the behavior and
attitudes of the child in accordance with the set standard of conduct, usually an absolute
standard" (Baumrind, 1966, p. 890). For Baumrind (1966), this type of parent creates a
system of immutable values based on his or her belief that is derived from a source of
higher authority. This source can be either religiously based or hereditarily learned. The
Authoritarian parent demands total obedience and has no compunction about using
punitive methods to make this demand. There is no negotiation between the authoritarian
23
parent and the child. Rather, the child is expected to always be cognizant of the
distinction between him or her and the parents. This distinction dictates that children
should be seen and not heard and that without question the parent's word is law
(Baumrind, 1989). An Authoritative parental style, according to Baumrind (1966), differs

from the Authoritarian parental style because the Authoritative parent assumes his or her
child has rights.
The Authoritative parent recognizes and encourages the child's right to

individuality. The decisions made by the authoritative parents in governing the child are
usually communicated to the child along with an explanation of why the decisions were
made and the reasoning as to how the decisions were made. To this end, the Authoritative
parent is apt to negotiate with the child, and verbal give and take is encouraged. In fact,
the child's objection and an explanation of the objection are usually solicited (Baumrind,
1989). The Authoritative parent's openness and willingness to give and take should not
be misconstrued as indicative of one who is easily satisfied with the child's justifications.
Maccoby and Martin (1983) described the Authoritative parent as "high in

demandingness and responsiveness" (p. 89).
The demands made of the child and the openness between parent and child by the
authoritative parent provide a balanced approach to parenting.

Good parenting should involve an appropriate balance of warmth and
restrictiveness. Parents who are supportive and emotionally available to
their children but who also set realistic limits and consequences for their
children are more likely to raise children who have a more positive sense
of themselves and feel as though their own efforts make tangible
differences in their lives. (McClum & Merrell, 1998, p. 381)
The permissive parental style has been described by Baumrind (1966) as one in
which the child's actions and impulses are indulged by the parent. Baumrind (1989)
24
defined the permissive parent as one who does not believe in being punitive toward the
child. In fact, this type of parent is accepting and supporting of the child's actions and
impulses. Decisions concerning parental policies are made through consultation between
the permissive parent and the child. There is no demand made on the child regarding
household responsibilities or standards of expectations. The child is allowed to behave
however he or she wants, as the permissive parent does not accept any responsibility for
the shaping of the child's current or future behaviors. The permissive parent may even
resort to the use of reasoning and limited manipulation, even bribery, in order to
accomplish a goal. The techniques of manipulation employed by the permissive parent
are void of power or force, as the parent tends to avoid exercising control over the child.
The child of the permissive parent is allowed to self-regulate his or her activities and to
determine acceptable behavior. Permissive parents are "responsive, warm, accepting, and
child centered, but not demanding. They lack parental control" (Ballantine, 2001, p. 48).
Dornbusch et al (1987), defined permissive parents as indifferent to grades and
uninolved in their children's education. The permissive parents "are defined as low in
both responsiveness and demandingness" (Maccoby & Martin, 1983, p. 23) as they do
not make any demand of their children to perform any tasks including in their academics.
Baumrind (1966) and Epstein (1991) established distinctions between parental
styles and school related parenting practices. Both Baumrind (1966) and Epstein (1991)
made a connection between school-related parenting practices and student academic
achievement and prosocial behavior. In the theory of overlapping spheres (Epstein, 1995;
Epstein et al 2002) the three major contexts in which students learn and grow are
identified as: the family, the school and the community. Darling and Steinberg (1993)
25
noted the interconnectedness among parental styles, parent-child interaction and parentschool involvement.
Like Symonds (1939) before her, Baumrind (1966) identified three parental styles
based on parents' beliefs: Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive. She eschews the
notion that parental control could be measured on a continuum, but that it could more
accurately be discussed from the perspective of the parents' beliefs system. In fact,
Baumrind (1966), like Darling and Steinberg (1993) made the point that individual
aspects of parenting such as control, demands, ideology, and specific disciplinary
practices are borne out of the parents' beliefs system from which emanates the parental
style. Thus the influence of one aspect of parenting is dependent on everything else, and
does not in itself determine the parental style.
Baumrind (1991) made the argument that the parent-child interaction is
determined by the type of parental style. In fact, children whose parents practice either
the permissive or authoritarian style of parenting communicate less effectively than do
children with authoritative parents. Boveja (1998) argued that parents who practice an
authoritative parental style raise students with better study strategies and more effective
learning than do authoritarian or permissive parents.
Baumrind and Black (1967) studied the impact of authoritative, authoritarian and
permissive parental styles and their relationship to student behavior and concluded that
there is a positive correlation between student behaviors and the preferred parental style
in the European-American families. The Authoritative parental style yields the most
favorable behavioral results in European-American student population, while the
authoritarian parental style resulted in behavioral outcomes such as hostility, and

resistance in her European-American sample. On the other hand, the correlations
26
between academic achievement and authoritarian, authoritative, and the permissive
parental styles on the African-American student population are rarely studied. Baumrind
(1972) found that, unlike her European-American sample, there was no evidence that the
authoritarian parental style was associated with negative behaviors such as hostility and
resistance in her African-American student sample.
McLeod, Kruttschnitt, and Dornfeld (1994) studied the impact of parental styles
on student behavior. Their findings suggest that there is a difference between the effect of
parental styles on European-American students and African-American students. Their
conclusion states that the most effective parental style for European-American students
was the authoritative style of parenting. However, African-American students yielded
better behavioral results through the authoritarian style of parenting. Steinberg, Elmen,
and Mounts (1986) supported the view that parental influence is a strong predictor of
academic success among children of White professional families. They concluded that
"positive effects of authoritativeness were greatest for White youth" (p. 1435).
Querido, Warner and Eyeberg (2002), also examined the relationships of the
authoritative, authoritarian and permissive parental styles and student behavior problems
in African-American students. Baumrind (1972), Hall and Bracken (1996), and Querido,
et al. (2002) did not find any evidence to concur with McLeod, et al. (1994) who reported
that the authoritarian parental style was most beneficial in producing the fewest
behavioral problems in African-American students. Hall and Bracken (1996) refuted
previous findings suggesting that African-American children produce positive behavioral
outcomes with an authoritarian style of parenting. In fact, the students who reported that
their parents were authoritative in their style of parenting also reported having a better
interpersonal relationship with their parents than students whose parents were identified
27
as being authoritarian in style. McLeod, et al. (1994) reported that physical discipline was
associated with disruptive behavior in European-American children and not with AfricanAmerican children.
All of these researchers agree that parental styles do have an effect on student
behavior. Though, all parents are desirous of seeing their offspring achieve success in
school, some parents are better able to attain this goal than others (Rothstein, 2004).
Rothstein (2004) further argued that "changing the way parents deal with their children
may be the single most important thing we can do to improve children's cognitive skills"
(p. 140). Darling and Steinberg (1993) also made the point that the degree of influence
that parents have over their children is directly proportional to the parent-child
interaction.
Reich (1991) studied White-American adolescents to determine the relationship

between their perception of parental love and control and their academic achievement
levels. Reich (1991) concluded that the school drop-out rate is linked to parents not
expressing love to their children. He also argued that there was a higher rate of adolescent
drug users in families with a greater communication gap between parents and children
and either a permissive or authoritarian parental style. Both the authoritarian and
permissive parental styles contribute to students' faulty learning styles and ineffective
study strategies.
Boveja (1998) conducted a similar study based on the hypothesis that perceived
authoritative parental style would result in greater academic achievement than would
perceived authoritarian or permissive parental styles. The study involved high school
students in grades 9 through 12 in a large city in the eastern United States. The school
consisted of 800 students. The female to male ratio was 60 to 40 percent. Racial
28
composition of this school was 60 percent Hispanic-American, 20 percent AfricanAmerican, 15 percent Asian-American and 5 percent other. Ninety-five percent of the
students were in the free or reduced price lunch program. The result of the study
confirmed the initial hypothesis that there is a link between perceived parental styles and
student academic achievement.
Steinberg, Elmen, and Mounts (1986) completed a study in which they hoped to
prove that authoritative parental style promoted student achievement. The study was
conducted using 157 working-and middle-class families whose children attended public
high schools in Madison, Wisconsin. The data for this study were collected in April and
June of 1985. The study's finding was that students from households in which parents
used authoritative style of parenting performed better academically than students whose
parents had other parental styles.
Querido et al. (2002) concluded that,
The authoritative parenting style was most predictive of fewer behavior
problems in our sample of African-American preschool children,
supporting our hypothesis. This finding is similar to European-American
families, which have shown that the authoritative parenting style has a
positive impact on child development (Baumrind, 1983) and is consistent
with studies of Chinese children showing an association between
authoritative parenting and children's school and social adjustment.
Darling and Steinberg (1993) observed that there was a direct link
between the parental style and specific parenting practice. They found that
interactions between the parent and the child were directly correlated to the type
of parental style. In addition, parental styles dictated the level of influence that
parents had on their children. Consequently, parent-school involvement was
associated with the prevailing parental styles, parental influence, and parent-child
interaction.
29
The concept of Non-Coercive parental style as an expansion of Baumrind's

(1966) typology of parental styles was developed by Gerald (2007). Gerald's (2007)
study was conducted using parents of grade 4 students who took the English Language
Arts examinations in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 school years. There were 65 students in
grade 4 in 2003-2004 and 85 students in grade 4 in 2004-2005. These two groups of

students represented 70 families of students in a low wealth urban elementary school in
New York State. Parents' school-related parenting practices and their parental styles were
studied to determine the relationships of these two variables to student academic
achievement (Gerald, 2007). After completing his factor analysis of parent responses,
Gerald (2007) confirmed Baumrind's (1966) parental styles of authoritarian, authoritative

and permissive styles of parenting. In addition, Gerald (2007) realized that there was an
emerging group of parents whose style of parenting seemed best described as NonCoercive and involved few expectations for success, few communications or support for
desired achievement.
The Non-Coercive parent, much like the permissive parent, made few demands on
children and unlike the permissive parent, the non-coercive parent did not use
manipulation to accomplish anything with the children. The Non-Coercive parent takes a
more hands off approach to parenting. Opinions are unsolicited and inquiries are
unwelcome in the non-coercive household (Gerald, 2007).
School-Related Parenting Practices
Early attention to the role of parent in the American educational setting can be
traced back to the 1800s. In the early 1800s, parents in the United States held dominion
over their children's moral upbringing and schools were assigned sole responsibility to
attend to the children's educational needs. Consequently, the first parent education
30
classes were focused on the natural sinfulness of children. Up to the early 1 900s,
educators saw parental involvement in the school as counterproductive, as parents were

viewed as uncooperative and unwilling to get involved in their children's education
(Cutler, 2000). Finders and Lewis (1994) highlighted other reasons such as parents'
experiences in school, poverty, lack of time, and cultural and language barriers for the
lack of parental involvement in their children's education. Mannan and Blackwell (2001)
noted that school personnel held expectations that parents are involved in their children's
education but the school leaders did not create an atmosphere conducive to parents'
involvement. The schools fail to educate the parents in ways that would make their
involvement meaningful and pleasant.
The 1960s brought two major events that helped to propel expectations for the
modern day parent-school involvement process. The Civil Rights Movement created an
increase in parent groups advocating for the rights of their children in American
classrooms. Coupled with this, was the birth of federally funded programs such as the
Head Start program: a community based program designed to address the needs of
preschool and disadvantaged children (Gestwicki, 1996).
Research on parent-school involvement has been more prevalent within the last
30 years compared to the last 200 years. In a large part, the National Commission on
Excellence in Education's publication ofA Nation At Risk in April 1983, contributed to
the focus on parents. This report highlighted a growing concern about the decline of the
standard of education in American educational institution. Americans were awakened to
the reality that what was once thought to be one of the best educational systems in the
world was, in actuality, receiving failing grades. "Our once unchallenged preeminence in
commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by
31
competitors throughout the world" (National Commission on Excellence in Education, A

Nation at Risk, 1983, p. 1). The need for parents to become more involved in the
educational institutions and for educational institutions to provide greater transparency
for parents was a major finding of the Commission's report.

Moreover, you bear a responsibility to participate actively in your child's
education. You should encourage more diligent study and discourage
satisfaction with mediocrity and the attitude that says "let it slide";
monitor your child's study; encourage good study habits; encourage your
child to take more demanding rather than less demanding courses; nurture
your child's curiosity, creativity, and confidence, and be an active
participant in the work of the schools. (National Commission on

Excellence in Education, 1983, p.l)
Chavkin and Williams (1985) reported that, based on the findings of a Parent
Involvement in Education Project, the majority of parents had a positive attitude about
the importance of parental involvement in their children's education. Ninety-five percent

of these parents indicated that they were directly involved in various areas of their
children' educational development: helping with homework, cooperating with teachers,
and accepting responsibility for getting involved. Other areas such as: choosing
classroom discipline methods, amount of homework assigned, placement of children in
special education programs, and the hiring of principals and teachers received between 50
percent and 83.2 percent. The lowest percentage points were reported in the areas of the
questionnaire that denied parents responsibility for their children's academic
achievement.
The results of Chavkin and Williams' (1985) survey, based on a follow-up study
by Chavkin and Garza-Lbeck (1990), revealed that regardless of race, there was no
difference in parent attitudes about the importance of parental involvement in school.
According to Chavkin and Williams (1987), parents have shown that their role in their
children's educational development is of paramount importance to them. This
development can only be achieved through meaningful home-school collaboration.
Epstein's theories of overlapping spheres of influence (Epstein, 1995; Epstein et

al 2002), echoed the importance for parental involvement in their children's education by
examining the main avenues of educational influence in children: community, school,
and home. For students to achieve their optimum academic capabilities, it is imperative
that the lines of separation among school, home and community be blurred. Where all
three entities overlap they begin to function as one entity. When the overlap operates at
optimal levels school personnel will see students as children and as members of the
family. Parents will feel more welcomed and respected and as integral members of the
educational process.
Families embrace the school's ideals. Children are encouraged to attend school
and to apply themselves to their studies. Parents model the virtues of education for their
children by helping them understand and complete school assignments. Ho Siu-Chu and
Willms (1996) reported that parental involvement in their children's education was the
single most important contribution that parents can make to their children's educational
achievement. This includes talking to children about school in discussions conducted at
home. The findings also revealed that "there was little variation among schools in
average levels of home discussion, which suggested that relatively few schools have
strong influences on learning climate at home" (Ho Siu-Chu & Willms, 1996, p. 138).
Schools, therefore, need to extend more support for parents to help them be better
conduits of education at home. Zinsmeister (1996) argued that "most public schools are
somewhat between lukewarm and openly resentful towards parent activism" (p. 45).
33
Mannari and Blackwell (2001) noted that school personnel expect parents to get involved,
but do not provide the parents with the means of doing so. For meaningful involvement to
take place, schools need to do a better job of empowering parents. They need to make
available workshops, seminars, and conferences coupled with a welcoming atmosphere to
raise the comfort level of the parents, many of whom are not properly prepared to assist
their children (Mannan & Blackwell, 2001).
The National Center for Educational Statistics NCES (2002), Carey, Farris
and Westat, Inc. (1996); Carey, Lewis, Farris and Westat, Inc. (1998); U.S. Department
of Education (2001), and U.S. Department of Education (2003) examined the issue of the
level of parental involvement in schools. School-related parental activities such as
attendance at school events, participation in decision making, and the existence of
advisory groups or policy councils were examined in a poll of principals in 900 K-8
schools in the United States that consisted of 60,000 elementary school children. The
findings, as reported by Carey et al (1996), revealed that more than 50 percent of the
elementary principals reported that all or most parents attended regularly scheduled
conferences. Forty-nine percent of the principals reported that all or most of the parents
attended open-house or back-to-school night. Thirty-six percent of the principals reported
that all or most parents attended plays, dances or musicals. Twelve percent reported all or
most parents attended sporting events. Academic activities, for example, a science fair,
were attended by all or most parents in only 19 percent of the schools. While forty
percent of the principals considered parents in decision making, albeit to a limited extent,
only 22 percent of the principals gave any consideration to the inclusion of parent in the
decision-making process in areas such as curriculum, discipline policies, library books,
teacher evaluations, allocation of funds, and the development of parental involvement
34
programs. Ironically, the highest percent of parental decision making input reported by
the principals - 68 percent - was in the area of parents' participation in parental
involvement programs.
The results of the Carey et al (1996) survey underscored the need for a renewed
focus on parent involvement in school related activities. There is still a lot of room for
greater cooperation between the school and the home. The result of the survey also
confirmed Zinsmeister' s (1996) report that schools are not very inviting or open to
parents' input. Furthermore, the report confirmed Mannan and Blackwell's (2001) view
that schools needed to do a better job of getting parents involved. It is clear that, with the
numerous research on parenting and school-related activities, the findings are very
consistent: Student achievement will be greatly enhanced if schools were more like
families and families more like schools (Epstein, 2001, Epstein et al 2002).
Self-concept, Academic Self-concept and Anger Control; Parental Styles, and

School Related Parenting Practices are frequently researched topics pertaining to student
academic achievement. This study acknowledged the importance of these five variables
as important contributors to student academic achievement. However, the study proposes

that these variables are important factors in predicting student achievement levels. A
study of these variables and their influence on student academic achievement levels
should not be conducted with these variables being treated as five independent variables.
This study was conducted with the view that that a study of all the variables working
simultaneously with each other will produce a more accurate result as to the level of
student academic achievement. To this end, student Self-Concept, Academic Self-
Concept, and student Anger Control were used as moderating variables that influence the
35
achievement levels of students as well as their parents' Parental Styles and School
Related Parenting Practices.
Self-Concept
Self-Concept is the opinion that a student formulates of him or herself. This
opinion is formed through the environmental experiences that the student encounters,
which usually are reinforced by individuals or the environment (Shavelson et al 1976).
Self-concepts manifest themselves in psychological well being and general confidence

(Hamachek, 1995). "The importance of self-concept as a relevant outcome variable is
evident in diverse settings, including social psychology, personality, education child
development" (Marsh & Hau, 2004, p. 56). "People who perceive themselves to be more
effective, more confident, and more able will accomplish more than people who have less
positive beliefs" (Marsh, Trautwein, Ludtke, Koller, & Baumert, 2005, p. 379). An
individual's successful performance in any task, regardless of the other variables in
existence, hinges on whether or not the individual has a positive attitude about himself or
herself.
Perry-Burney and Takyi (2002) made the argument that self-confidence

significantly predicts student academic achievement. The level of self-confidence is
positively correlated with the level of academic achievement. Jacobs, Vernon, and Eccles
(2004) investigated the correlations among social self-concept, time use and involvement
in problem behaviors during stages of the adolescent years. They concluded that a
positive self-concept was a predictor of reduced problem behaviors.
A study conducted by Rodkin, Farmer, Pearl, and Van Acker (2000) of 452
popular boys was done to determine if the boys, ranging from grade 4 to grade 6 school
aged, could be classified as either antisocial or prosocial - tough or model students. The
36
boys fitting the category of antisocial or tough were found to be predominantly AfricanAmerican. The self-concept of the tough boys was aggressive, physically competent and
among some of the most socially integrated and popular boys in their school. The selfconcept prosocial boys were not aggressive and were academically competent. Shiefele
and Csikszentmihalyi (1994), Eccles and Barber (1999), Haggard and Williams (1992)
and Rodkin et al. (2000) argued that the social identity grouping of students and the
activities of the individuals in the groups are predicated upon the way in which the
students identified themselves.
Shavelson et al (1976) defined self-concept as a person's perception of himself or
herself. These perceptions are formed through one's experience with the environment.
The perceptions are especially influenced by environmental reinforcements and through
reinforcements of significant others. Shavelson et al. (1976) and Marsh and O'Neil
(1984) defined academic self-concept as a student's perception of his or her academic
abilities, performance and achievement. This perception is usually the result of
environmental reinforcements. Academic self-concept is one important dimension of a
larger self-concept. According to Corbire and Mbekou (1997), an understanding of
students' academic achievement must begin with an understanding of students' academic
self-concept and academic interests.
Eccles (1983), Schiefele (1991), and Wigfield and Eccles (1994) discussed
academic interests student's preference or proclivity toward some academic subjects
over others as a distinct academic concept. They challenged the concept of academic
interest being a dimension in determining student academic self-concept. Michael and
Smith (1976) considered academic interest to be a part of academic self-concept. This
37
notion is supported by studies conducted in Japan, Portugal and Spain (Huang &
Michael, 2000; Menjares, Michael, & Rueda, 2000; Paik & Michael, 2000, 2002; Villar,
Michael, & Gribbons, 1 995) that suggested the existence of a correlation between student
academic interest and student academic self-concept. Shavelson et al. (1976) mentioned
that academic self concept was an important piece of a more general self-concept
displayed by children and teenagers.
Anger Control
Anger Control, as defined by the American Psychological Association (2004), is

the use of self-management and self-control strategies to reduce both emotional and
psychological behaviors in an effort to promote constructive behavior. According to

Kovacs and Devlin (1998), student behavioral problems can be either externally or
internally manifested. External behavioral problems are directed at others mainly in the
form of aggression, frustration or anger. Anderson (1978) made a distinction between
aggression and anger. "Anger is a temporary emotional state caused by frustration,
whereas aggression is often an attempt to hurt a person or destroy property" (p. 1). Skiba
and McKelvey (2000) viewed anger as one of the most devastating dimensions in student
academic achievement. Students who are not able to control their anger will incur
disciplinary actions, including removal from classes and possibly suspensions. These
disruptions in the students' educational opportunities often result in the students falling
behind in their schoolwork, which in turn leads to more frustration. This further
frustration results in continued exhibition of anger as a defense mechanism against
possible failure and low self-esteem exacerbated by the student's absence from the
classroom.
38
In a large-scale study conducted on 2, 213 high school boys in 87 high schools,

Felson, Liska, South and McNulty (1994), concluded that male students who are
frustrated academically are very likely to become resentful of schools. Students who
resent schools exhibit more propensities toward being violent and causing property
damage to their schools. Tamaki (1994) observed that schools need to develop curricula
and programs to address student anger. The benefits students derive from any such
program will be extended to the schools and the community (Tamaki, 1994).
Feindler, Marriot, and Iwata (1984) are proponents of anger management
programs for students and champion the benefits that can be derived from these
programs. The form and substance of any anger management program needs to be given
serious consideration with respect to other possible mitigating circumstances that may
result in a manifestation of anger. Rusielewicz (2005) concluded that the Reconnecting
Youth Program did not result in the anticipated positive change in behavior in the
participants when compared with a non-treatment group of students. In fact, he concluded

that the participants in the interview program in ninth grade became sensitive to their own
weaknesses and social failings. They required additional years of support beyond the
ninth grade program that the school provided. More importantly, the female students who
completed the program reported a decline in self-esteem that indicated the necessity for
additional counseling and support in 10th grade.

Summary of Research Literature
Parents are their children's first teachers. The old adage that "children live what
they learn" is just as applicable in the home environment as it is in the school setting.
Diana Baumrind's (1966) emphasis on parental styles, and Ira Gerald's (2007) conclusion
that learning at home is of paramount importance in student academic achievement both
39
underscore this premise. Joyce Epstein's (1991) making the connection of the three social
institutions of learning - family, school and community - as being interdependent upon
each other to promote the ideal learning institution confirms the important role of the
family in student academic achievement. However, this recipe for student achievement
cannot be achieved without the main ingredient: the students.
Students' roles in their academic achievement should not be viewed as secondary
to anything else. Their education can never be accomplished if students are not involved
in the process. As evidenced by the review of related literature, student dispositions of
Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control play an integral role in
determining student success. The premise of this study is that student dispositions will
affect their achievement level despite all the external accommodations made to effect an
environment most conducive to learning. Felson et al (1994) concluded that male
students who are frustrated academically are very likely to become resentful of schools.
Students who are frustrated academically became resentful of schools regardless of the
emphasis placed on institutions, parental styles and parenting practices.
Steinberg and Elmen's (1986) study on authoritative parental style and student
achievement conducted with 157 working-and middle-class families whose children
attended public high schools in Madison, Wisconsin concluded that students from
households where parents used authoritative style of parenting performed better
academically than students whose parents had other parental styles.
In their study on the impact of parental styles on students' behavior, McLeod et al
(1994) concluded that the authoritative parental style was the most effective parental style
of any other parental styles in promoting positive academic achievement in EuropeanAmerican students. Elmen and Mounts (1992) supported the view that parental influence
40
is a strong predictor of academic success among children of White professional families.

They concluded that "positive effects of authoritativeness were greatest for White youth"
(p. 1435).
The district in which this study was conducted was predominantly European-
American with 70 percent White and 30 percent Non-White. The middle school for this
sample population was also 70 percent White and consistent with the demographics of
the district. A review of the related literature revealed that an authoritative parenting style
was associated with higher achieving students. Based on the review of related literature,
it was necessary for a sixth research question to be added to this study.
Since the related literature review revealed that Authoritative parenting style
was associated with higher achievement of students at school, what parenting practices
predict Authoritative parental style?
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Introduction
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among parental
styles, parenting practices, and student dispositions of self-concept, academic selfconcept, and anger control and student academic achievement. Student achievement
levels were based on the grade 8 New York State mathematics examination. The
parental styles were studied were authoritarian, permissive and authoritative (Baumrind,
1989), and non-coercive (Gerald 2007).
Three of Epstein and Dauber's (1991) six school-related parenting practices Parenting, Volunteering and Learning at Home - were examined for their relationship to
student achievement levels. A fourth parenting practice - School Participation developed by Gerald (2007) was examined for its relationship to students' achievement.
The following research questions guided this study.
1.
How do parents of eighth-grade students describe their parental styles in four

categories: Permissive, Authoritative, Authoritarian and Non-Coercive?
2.
How do parents of eighth-grade students describe their school related practices

in four categories: Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, and School
Participation?
3.
Do male and female eighth-grade student dispositions of self-concept, academic

self-concept and anger control differ?
42
4.
How do parents of male and female eighth-grade students differ in their schoolrelated parenting practices of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home and
School Participation; their parental styles of Permissive, Authoritative and
Authoritarian; and student groupings in Level 3 and 4 in mathematics?
5.
What relationships are there among parenting practices of Parenting, School

Participation, Learning at Home and Volunteering; Student dispositions of SelfConcept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control; and parental styles of
Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student proficiency levels on the
eighth-grade mathematics examinations in the 2007-2008 school year?
6.
Since the related literature review revealed that authoritative parenting style was
associated with higher achievement of students at school, what parenting
practices predict Authoritative parental style?

Selection of Subjects
For this study, the students who were in eighth grade during the 2007- 2008
school year, who took the mathematics State standardized test and received either a
Level 3 or Level 4 in one middle school were selected. There were 70 eligible students.
Only members of the cohorts who participated in the New York State mathematics
examinations and received Levels 3 or 4, and who were not receiving English as a
Second Language services at the time of the examinations were selected for this
research study. The parents of students participating in this research were included in
the study. The criterion for the determination of the selected school was accessibility of
students' records. Parents' and students' responses and scores were matched for
analytical purposes.
43
Setting
The setting of this study was a Long Island, New York middle school. The total
student population of the district was 1,700. The district was ethnically diverse: 70
percent White, 12 percent Native American, 14 percent Black, 3 percent Hispanic and 1
percent Asian and Pacific Islander. The middle school for this sample population was
consistent with the demographics of the district. Twenty-three percent of students in this
district were free or reduced price lunch program recipients. The middle school from
which the subjects were drawn was comprised of approximately 450 students with 100
students in grade 8. Originally, 100 parents were invited to participate. Only 34 parents
agreed with their children to participate in this study. All 34 students who participated in
this study scored Levels 3 or 4 on the 2008 New York State eighth-grade mathematics
examinations. Level 3 was proficiency and Level 4 was mastery.
The culture of this school district and in the middle school was one in which
parent involvement in the schools was actively sought and received. There was open
communication at all levels with parents and caregivers. All staff members were
provided access to email and were encouraged to use it as another means of
communicating with parents. Most teachers had a "My Teacher Page," an Internet-based
public access website equivalent to a teacher's individual website, which was made
public to students and their parents as a means of transparency and another means of
communications. Every classroom was equipped with a telephone and parents could call
and leave messages on the teacher's direct line.
Students in this middle school were encouraged by the staff to achieve academic
success. Teachers worked in a team structure in which the same group of teachers taught
the same students. The teachers within the team all had common planning time every
44
day. Teachers were encouraged to plan and meet with parents, whenever necessary, on
alternate days. Students and parents were kept apprised of the students' grades through
an online grade book.
Another method of motivating students to achieve their fullest potential in this
middle school was the numerous extra-curricular activities and clubs. There were about
20 after-school clubs that were opened to all students throughout the school year. In
addition, students in grades 7 and 8 were encouraged to participate in various sports
such as football, basketball, baseball, softball, field hockey, soccer, tennis, volleyball,
track and field, and wrestling. Most of these sports had both boys' and girls' teams. In a
building of 450 students, with less than 250 of them in grades 7 and 8, there were
numerous opportunities for every student to get involved in an extracurricular activity.

The overall culture was to allow students to find their passion for something which
could bring them success.
Data Gathering Techniques
For this study, a two-part survey was administered to identify parenting practices
related to school, parental styles and student dispositions. The first questionnaire was a
parent questionnaire based on Gerald's (2007) survey instrument. The second
questionnaire was administered to students and investigated their dispositions of SelfConcept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control.
The parent questionnaire was derived from Epstein's (1991) survey of Parents'
Questionnaire measuring the four dimensions of parental involvement - parenting,
volunteering, learning at home and school participation - and Baumrind's (1966)
questionnaire on parental styles - Authoritarian, Permissive, and Authoritative
practices. In addition, questions in the parent questionnaire were also used to address
45
Non-Coercive parental style based on Gerald's (2007) research. This parent

questionnaire was comprised of 48 questions.
A student survey consisting of 24 questions comprised the second part of the
survey and was focused on student dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic SelfConcept and Anger Control. The student survey was an amalgamation of sections based
on Marsh and O'Neil's (1984) and Rusielewicz's (2005) student surveys.
Copies of the students' survey were made available in the main office for
parents. The students' survey was administered to students during the school day at
school. Parent consent was sought prior to the administration of the student survey.
Students were asked to sign an assent statement that they had been apprised of their
right to decline participation. The students who decided to participate did so their own
volition.
Permission was sought from the superintendent of the school district to survey
both the parents and the students being targeted for this study. Permission was also
sought from the superintendent to access the necessary demographic and academic data
of the students involved in the study.
Efforts were made to keep the identity of the parents, students and the school
involved in this research confidential in accordance with the stipulations of the Dowling
College Institutional Review Board (IRB) for research involving human subjects.
Survey Questionnaire One
The parents' survey used for this study was an adaptation of Ira Gerald's (2007)
survey instrument. This survey was developed using criteria based on the works of
Baumrind (1966) and Epstein (1991). The survey was a variation and an amalgamation
of Epstein's (1991) survey of Parents' Questionnaire and Baumrind's (1966) Parent
46
Rating Scale. After factor analysis using the information garnered from 70
questionnaires addressing Epstein's (1991) six dimensions of parental practice, Gerald
(2007) identified five factors with Eigenvalues above 1 . These five factors accounted for
71 percent of the variance. For this study, the four factors accounting for the highest
percent of variances in Gerald's (2007) research were used: Parenting, 37.5 percent;
Volunteering, 15.1 percent; School Participation 10.8 percent; and Learning at Home,
5.5 percent. These four factors accounted for 68.9 percent of the 71 percent of variance
in student achievement that Gerald (2007) reported for students in elementary school.
The subjects for Gerald's (2007) research were students who took the grade 4 ELA
examination in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 and who received Levels 1 through 4.
Students were grouped into two categories based on their scores: proficient (Levels 3
and 4) and non-proficient (Levels 1 and 2) (Gerald, 2007).
Validity
Prior content validity of the survey was determined by Gerald (2007) using a
group ofparents as a jury. This parent jury was followed by factor analysis to establish
construct validity. Construct validity of the responses obtained in this study could not be
established through factor analysis because of insufficient responses based on the
number of questions compared to the number of respondents.
Reliability
A coefficient of internal consistency was calculated for each subscale. This was
used to determine which items would remain. A Cronbach reliability analysis was also
performed for the purpose of determining the alpha reliability statistic for each subscale.
Factor analysis was not able to be performed on the parent survey results due to
insufficient data. There were more items in the parent survey than the number of parents
47
participating in the study. The coefficient of internal consistency was used to determine
which items were to remain in the subscale.
Table 3.1
Components Matrix for Parents' Questionnaire

Variables
Items
Range
Parenting
12, 13, 14, & 16
4-20
Volunteering
3, 4, 5, 6 & 9
5-25
7, 8, 10, 17 & 18
5-25
Learning at Home
11,15, 19,39, 46, 47 & 48
7-35
Authoritarian
20, 23,27, 31,32 & 34
6-30
Permissive
21, 24, 33 , 35, 40, 41, 42 & 43
8-40
Authoritative
22, 25, 26, 37, 38, 44 & 45
7-35
Non-Coercive
28, 29, 30 & 36
4-20
Reference
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Adapted from
Gerald (2007)
Table 3.1 illustrates the grouping of questions after factor analysis conducted by
Gerald (2007). Internal consistency was calculated by Gerald (2007) for each subscale.
Table 3.2 illustrates deleted items from parent survey in this study after a Cronbach
reliability analysis was conducted for the 34 responses in each subscale related to
students in this survey.
Raw Score Range
This survey utilized a 5 point Likert scale with raw score ranging from 4 to 40.
Each dimension is displayed in Table 3.1.
48
Table 3.2
Deleted Items from Parent Survey Instrument

Item
Variables
Number
Volunteering
I attend PTA meeting.
Learning at
19
I involve my child in religious-based educational
Home
Item
activities.
Authoritarian
34
I allow my child the physical freedom to explore his/her
Permissive
24
My idea of what my rights and duties are as a parent
Permissive
33
environment away from home.
Authoritative
25
Non-Coercive
28
cannot be explained or defined.
I always welcome my child's bid for closeness with a

great deal of personal attention and enthusiasm.
When my child does not do what I wish, I remain
reasonable and explore the problem further with my child
without expecting or insisting on obedience.
When my child runs a risk of hurting himself/herself, I

exaggerate the seriousness of the injury and try to frighten
my child into avoiding similar situations in the future.
Non-Coercive
29
In childrearing, I do not believe one person should
Non-Coercive
30
I openly disregard or reject my child's question when I am
Non-Coercive
36
directing or criticizing him/her.

playground
My child is if
allowed
he/she towants
remain
to. after school in the
exercise power over another.
Instrument or Survey Questionnaire Two
A second survey instrument was utilized with students. This students' survey
incorporated questions on student dispositions, which for the purpose of this study were
defined based on Marsh and O'Neil (1984) and Rusielewicz (2005) as student selfconcept, academic self-concept, and anger control.
Validity
A factor analysis of student responses was used to establish construct validity

for each subscales.
49
Table 3.3
Components Matrix of Students' Questionnaire
_____Variables
Questions
Range
8-40
Marsh & O'Neil (1984)
Concept
2, 5, 13, 15, 19, 21, 22 & 24
8-40
Marsh & O'Neil (1984)
Anger Control
1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 18, & 23
8-40
Rusielewicz (2005)
Self-Concept
7, 8, 9,11,14, 16, 17&20
Reference
Academic Self-
Factor Analysis
A factor analysis was conducted to determine if the responses from the eight
items on Self-Concept, the eight items on Academic Self-Concept, and the eight items
on Anger Control; comprising the 24 items on the student questionnaire supported
Marsh and O'Neil's (1984) descriptions of Self-Concept and Academic Self-Concept;
and Rusielewicz's (2005) description of Anger Control. The factor analysis was
performed on all 24 items in the three factors using a Principal Component extraction
method with a Varimax rotation on each of the three factors. Tables 3.4 through 3.6
present results of factor analysis of each sub scale of the student survey with strong
factor loading items on
only one factor.
In table 3.4, Varimax rotation explained 7.6 percent of the variance for the
dimension of Self-Concept. Two items that did not report factor above .35 were
eliminated from this factor. Six items in the dimension of Self-Concept were used for
the rest of the study. The Eigenvalue for Self-Concept after Varimax rotation was 3.16.
50
Table 3.4
Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Student Disposition

N = 34
Factor Name: Self-Concept

Factor Loading Item Number
Item
.860
q8
I have very negative feelings about myself.
h2
.740
.758
.720
.634
.576
ql6
ql7
qll
q7
I am never in a good mood.

I am not of all accepting of myself.
I lack self-confidence.
I don't have much respect for myself
.574
.518
.401
.332
______.355
ql4
I don't do things that are important.
.126
Eigenvalue = 3.163 Percent of Variance = 7.591
Table 3.5 presents the results of factor analysis after Varimax Rotation was
conducted. Five items were deleted from this dimension because they did not report
factor loadings above .35. There was a 3.7 percent variance for the dimension of
Academic Self-Control with an Eigenvalue of 1.85.
Table 3.5
Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition

N = 34
Factor Name: Academic Self-Concept

Item
.779
ql5s
I have trouble with most academic subjects.
.634
______.550
Eigenvalue = 1 .850
h2
.607
q21s
I hate most academic subjects.
.402
ql9s
I get bad marks in most academic subjects
.302
Percent of Variance = 3.693
Table 3.6 presents the results of factor analysis on the dimension of Anger
Control after Varimax Rotation was conducted. Two items were dropped from this
dimension because they did not report factor loading above .35. There was a 16.8
percent variance for the dimension of Anger Control with Eigenvalue of 3.68. Items in
the dimension of Student disposition account for 28.1 percent of the variance.
51
Table 3.6
Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition

N = 34
Factor Name: Anger Control

Item
h2
.896
q3s
I take out my anger unfairly on others.
.802
.795
qls
I often feel like I might lose control of my
.632
anger.
.749
q23s
I easily become so upset that I have to hit

something.
.562
.744
q6s
I easily get really mad.
.554
.679
.502
qlOs
ql 8s
I yell at others when I get angry.

I am willing to have a physical fight to
.461
.252
______________________________prove I'm right.

Eigenvalue = 3.676 Percent of Variance = 16.758
Table 3.7
Deleted Items from Student Survey Instrument

Variables
Item Number
Item
Self-Concept
9
I have lots of friends that respect me very much.
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Anger Control
Anger Control
20
2
I have very good self-esteem.

I learn quickly in most academic subjects.
I pick up concepts very slowly in the classroom.
13
I am never creative when given an assignment.
22
I am always prepared for my classes.
24
I enjoy doing work for most academic subjects.
4
L2
I don't do things that are important.

I get easily annoyed.
Table 3.7 presents the nine items deleted from student survey. Items here all
reported factor loading below the .35 factor level. Table 3.7 presents the newly
developed student survey with the dimensions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept
and Anger Control.
52
Table 3.8
Newly Defined Dimensions of Student Questionnaire
Number of Items
Range
Self-Concept
Dimensions
7, 8, 11, 14, 16 & 17
Items
6-30
Academic Self-
15, 19 & 21
3-15
1, 3, 6, 10, 18, & 23
6-30
Concept
Anger Control
Reliability
Parental styles and school-related parenting practices in this study were unable
to be analyzed using factor analysis because there were too few respondents. A
coefficient of internal consistency was conducted for each subscale to determine
which items were to remain in each subscale. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for schoolrelated parenting practices and parental styles range from .54 to .78 in Table 3.9. The
Chronbach alpha coefficients for student dispositions range from .67 to .86.
Table 3.9 presents the results of questions after testing for reliability. Gerald's
(2007) Non-Coercive variable revealed an unreliable Cronbach's alpha coefficient with
this population and was eliminated from any further consideration as a relevant parental
style in this study.
Table 3.9
Scale Reliabilities for Parents' Questionnaire

Variables
Items
Number
Range
___________________________________________of Items
Alpha
Coefficient
Parenting
Volunteering
Learning at Home
Authoritarian
12, 13, 14, & 16

4, 5, 6 & 9
7, 8, 10, 17 & 18
11, 15, 39, 46, 47 & 48
20, 23, 27, 31 & 32
4
4
5
6
5
4-20
4-20
5-25
6-30
5-25
.78
.73
.63
.73
.64
Permissive
Authoritative
21,35, 40, 41, 42 & 43

22, 26, 37, 38, 44 & 45
6
6
6-30
6-30
.54
.66
53
Table 3.10
Scale Reliability for Students' Questionnaire

Variables
Questions
Number of
Range
Alpha
6-30
Coefficient
.79
3-15
6-30
.67
.86
Items
Self-Concept
7, 8, 11, 14, 16 & 17
Academic Self-
Concept
Anger Control
3
6
15, 19&21
1,3,6, 10, 18, &23
Authoritarian
Learning
At Home
Volunteering
Parental
Permissive
Styles
Parenting
-^ Student
Academic
Achievement
$]
Practices
at School
P
School
Participation
p
Parenting
Authoritative
Student
Dispositions
T
Anger
Control
Self-Concept
Academic
Self-Concept
Figure 3.11 Modified Pictorial Representation of Research Hypothesis
54
Data Collection Procedures
Parent surveys were mailed to parents of students who were in eighth-grade in

the 2007-2008 school year who were not receiving English as a Second Language
services, and who took the New York State mathematics examinations in March 2008.
The original focus of this study was on parents whose children scored at Levels 1 and 2
contrasted with parents whose children scored at Levels 3 and 4 on the eighth-grade
mathematics examination of 2008. One hundred parents' surveys were mailed home to
parents. Included in the parents' survey envelope were copies of the students' survey
and parents' permission to survey their children. An explanation of participants' rights
and risk involved in participating in the survey was also included in the parents' survey
packet. A self-addressed stamped envelope was included with the survey to be

completed and returned.
Only 19 completed parents' surveys were returned of the 100 sent. A second
mailing of 8 1 surveys accompanied by telephone calls was completed. After two
mailings totaling 181 surveys, only 34 parents responded and gave permission for their
children to be surveyed. This was 34 percent of the eighth-grade students who
participated in the mathematics examination in March 2008. All the surveys received
were from parents whose children received Level 3 or Level 4 (proficiency and mastery
levels respectively). This accounted for 48.6 percent of the 70 students who received
Levels 3 or 4 on their mathematics examinations in 2008 in this suburban Long Island
school. The 34 survey responses were sufficient to contrast parents and students in
Levels 3 and 4. The students' surveys were conducted at their school with their parent's
agreement, and with their principal's cooperation.
55
The student survey was administered only to students whose parents gave
consent for them to be surveyed. The student surveys were conducted during the school
day at school by persons certified by National Institutes of Health to conduct researches
involving human subjects. Students had the option to decline the request for their
involvement in the survey without any penalty, even after parents have given their
consent. Students' responses were placed in a sealed envelope at the end of the
administration. Surveys were coded to align the parent's surveys with his or her child's
survey so that the parent's scores could be aligned with the child's dispositions on three
scales Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept, and Anger Control and their
mathematics scores. The coding system numbered each student and corresponding
parent survey in consecutive order. A record of which coded survey administered to

students was kept on a roster of the students in the cohort involved in the survey. This
coding system negated the need for parents to identify themselves by name and for the
child to be asked to identify his or her ethnicity on the survey. Student demographic and
academic data were acquired from the school's database and matched with the
respective students.
Both students and their parents were given an assurance that their responses
would be handled with the strictest level of confidentiality. All responses were secured
in a locked safe at an undisclosed location for a period of 3 years following the research
after which they would be incinerated.
Data Analysis
This study included a description and analysis of student achievement on the

eighth-grade mathematics standardized test based on parents' perception of their
parental styles, their parenting practices; student dispositions of self-concept, academic
56
self-concept, and anger control by student ethnicity and gender. The data was analyzed
using SPSS software to supply answers to the following six questions.
How do parents of eighth-grade students describe their parental styles in four

categories: Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian? Item analysis and descriptive
statistics were employed to answer this question.
How do parents of eighth-grade students describe their school related practices

in four categories: Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, and School
Participation? This question was answered using item analysis and descriptive statistics.
Do male and female eighth-grade student dispositions of self-concept, academic
self-concept and anger control differ? Independent means -test was employed to answer
question three.
How do parents of male and female students who receive Level 3 and Level 4 on
the grade 8 mathematics examinations differ in their school-related parenting practices
of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home and School Participation; parental styles
of Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian; and student groupings in Level 3 and 4
in mathematics? Independent means Mest was used to answer this question.

What relationships exist among parenting practices of Parenting, School

Participation, Learning at Home and Volunteering; Student dispositions of SelfConcept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control; and parental styles of
57
Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student proficiency level on the eighth-
grade mathematics examinations in 2007-2008 school year? Correlation analysis was

used to answer this question.
Research Question six
Since the related literature review revealed that authoritative parenting style was
associated with higher achievement of students at school, what parenting practices
predict Authoritative parental style? Correlation and partial correlation analyses were
used to answer this question.
58
CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine what role student dispositions of
self-concept, academic self-concept, and anger control play in the achievement levels of
eighth grade students on the New York State mathematics assessment of March 2008 in
a suburban, Long Island middle school. The study began with an acceptance of the value
of school related parenting practices of Parenting, Volunteering, School Participation,
and Learning at Home (Epstein, 1995) and their importance to student achievement.
Baumrind' s (1966) three parental stylesAuthoritarian, Permissive and Authoritative
in conjunction with a fourth parental style by Gerald (2007)Non-Coercivewere also
considered in this study to determine how both the parenting practices and the parental
styles affected student achievement as reported by Gerald (2007). However, this study
sought to go one step further in determining students' academic achievement. Another
goal of this study was to provide a greater understanding of the relationships among
student dispositions of self concept, academic self-concept, and anger control when
modified by parents' school related parenting practices and parental styles in
determining the level of student achievement in mathematics in one Long Island middle
school in 2008. After data collection, Non-Coercive parental style was deleted as a
viable parental style based on the responses among the respondents.
59
The data were collected using a parent survey and a student survey. These data
were analyzed to answer the following questions:
1 . How do parents of eighth grade students describe their parental styles in three
categories: Permissive, Authoritative, and Authoritarian?
2. How do parents of eighth grade students describe their school related parenting
practices in four categories: Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, and
School Participation?
3. Do male and female eighth grade student dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic

Self-Concept, and Anger Control differ?
4. How do parents of male and female students who receive Level 3 and Level 4 on
the grade 8 mathematics examinations differ in their school-related parenting
practices of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home and School Participation;
parental styles of Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian; and students'
groupings in Level 3 and 4 in mathematics?
5. What relationships are there among parenting practices of Parenting, School
Participation, Learning at Home and Volunteering; Student dispositions
of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control; and parental styles of
Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student proficiency level on the
eighth grade mathematics examinations in the 2007-2008 school year?
6. Since the related literature review revealed that authoritative parenting style was

predict Authoritative parental style?
This chapter presents the major findings based upon the aforementioned research
60
questions, description of the participants, and the statistical analysis of the data derived
by means of the parent survey and the student survey.
Demographic Analysis
Data for this study were gathered by means of two surveys. One survey was
from parents of students whose children completed the eighth-grade mathematics

assessment examinations in March 2008 in one suburban Long Island middle school.
The second survey was from the students of the parents who participated and gave
permission for their children to participate in the study. The survey was restricted to
students who were not receiving English as a Second Language (ESL) services at the
time they completed the examination. By excluding ESL students, the study provided an
increased possibility that both parents and students would be able to comprehend the
items in the survey that are presented in English. It also negated the need for the survey
to be translated into multiple languages to accommodate potentially multiple primary
languages. All students who participated in this study received Levels 3 or 4 on their
mathematics assessment examination.
The parents' survey questioned parents on their school-related parenting

practices of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, and School Participation and
their parental styles of Permissive, Authoritative and Authoritarian. The students'
survey questioned students about their dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic SelfConcept, and Anger control. The parents' surveys sent home also included copies of the
students' survey and parents' permission to survey their children. An explanation of
participants' rights and risk involved in participating in the survey was included in the
parents' survey packet. A self-addressed stamped envelope was included with the
survey to be completed and returned. Seventy parents and their students were eligible to
61
participate in this study. After two mailings, only 34 parents responded and gave
permission for their children to be surveyed. The students' surveys were conducted at
their school after their parents with their parent's agreement, and with the cooperation of
their principal. The total number of parents' and students' used for this study was 48.6
percent of the total potential families. Table 4.1 shows the demographic breakdown of
the students who participated in this study. There were 34 student respondents in this
study, 1 1 of whom were boys and 23 girls.
Table 4.1
Student Gender Breakdown

_____________________________Frequency
Valid
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Percent
Boys
11
30.6
32.4
32.4
Girls
23
63.9
67.6
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
Missing System
Total
5.6
36
100.0
Table 4.2 shows the achievement levels in mathematics by the student
respondents. All respondents passed the mathematics examination with either

proficiency Level 3 or Level 4. Each proficiency passing level accounted for 50 percent
of the respondents.
Table 4.2
Students' Mathematics Achievement Levels

___________________________Frequency
Valid
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Percent
Level 3
Level 4
Total
17
17
34
47.2
47.2
94.4
50.0
50.0
100.0
50.0
100.0
Missing System
5.6
Total
36
100.0
62
Quantitative Survey Findings

The first research question asked parents of eighth grade students to describe
their parental styles in three categories: Permissive, Authoritative, and Authoritarian.
Items in this section of the survey measured parental styles using a 5-point
Likert scale where 1 = Never; 2 = Hardly Ever; 3 = Sometimes; 4 = Often; and 5 =
Always. The question of parental styles was asked to determine if a difference in

parental styles can be used as a predictor of eighth-grade student proficiency levels on
mathematics standardized tests. Item analysis and descriptive statistics were employed
to answer this question.
Table 4.3
Frequency Table for Parental Styles
_____________________________Permissive
(N = 34)
Valid
33
Missing
Authoritative
32
Authoritarian
33
Mean
Std. Deviation
Minimum
13.48
2.95
8.00
18.09
3.36
14.00
19.55
3.21
13.00
Maximum
20.00
30.00
25.00
Number of Items
Table 4.3 presents the frequency table based on the parents' survey results for
the three parental styles. Thirty-four parents' surveys were used (N = 34). Permissive
parental style was comprised of six items and had a range of 6-30 and a mean of 13.4,
which indicated that parents disagreed that their parental style was best described as
permissive. Authoritative parental style was comprised of six items. With a range of 630 and a mean score of 1 8.0, parents indicated that they somewhat agreed that their
parental style could best be described as authoritative. Authoritarian parental style
63
consisted of five items. With a range of 5-25 and a mean score of 19.6, parents agreed
that their parental style could best be described as authoritarian.

Permissive Parental Style
Table 4.4
_________________________________
Q. 21
I offer my child little or no help with

school homework, even if asked because
the homework is not that important and
is really up to the child to complete.
Q. 3 5 My child is allowed to visit freely with

friends in the neighborhood.
N/HE
?/?
SD
94.1
2.9
2.9
1.26
0.79
23.5
26.5
50.0
3.26
1.11
32.4
58.8
3.68
0.98
57.6
39.4
3.0
2.27
0.80
94.1
0.0
5.9
1.44
0.79
88.2
8.8
2.9
1.65
0.88
Q.40 I prefer to let my child select his/her own

reading material.
8.8
Q.41
I prefer to let my child watch what

he/she wants to on television on the
principle that my child should choose

his/her own intellectual content.
Q.42 I do not believe that my child should

have to put his toys away and clean up
his/her own mess.
Q.43
I willingly clean up after my child and I
_______do not insist that he/she helps.
N = Never, HE = Hardly Ever, S = Sometimes, O = Often, A = Always

Further analysis of the dimensions of parental styles was conducted on each
parental style. The dimension of permissive parental style consisted of six items on a
5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were performed on each item of each parental
style. Table 4.4 presents the descriptive statistics for the six items in the dimension of
permissive parental style. Only two items had mean score above 3.0 within the
"sometimes," and "often or always" ranges. These two items accounted for the highest
64
mean and highest standard deviation in the dimension of Permissive parental style: Item
35 (M = 3.26, SD = 1.1 1), "My child is allowed to visit freely with friends in the
neighborhood" on which 50 percent the parents selected "often or always," and item 40
(M = 3.68, SD = 0.98), "I prefer to let my child select his or her own reading materials"
on which 58.8 percent of parents selected "often or always". The majority of the parents
indicated that they either "often or always" agreed with the statement in survey items 35
and 40. Survey items 21, 42, and 43 all had means of less than 2. Frequency analysis
revealed that most parents reported "never or hardly ever" on these items in the parent
survey dimensions of permissive parental styles. Parents responded "never or hardly

ever" 94.1 percent of the time to Items 21 and 42. Parents responded "never or hardly
ever" 88.2 percent of the time to Item 43.
Authoritative Parental Style
The dimension of Authoritative parental style consisted of six items on a 5-point
Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were performed on each item within this dimension.
Table 4.5 presents the descriptive statistics for the six items in the dimension of
Authoritative parental style. Four items had item mean scores above 3.0 within the
"sometimes," and "often or always" ranges: Parents responded "often or always" 47.1
percent of the time on Item 37, "My child has one or more tasks to perform which
he/she does regularly without choice" (M = 3.50, SD = 0.93). Parents responded "often
or always" 38.2 percent of the time on Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious part of
my childrearing policy because I value my child's work" (M = 3.47, SD = 0.83). The
majority of the parents, 55.9 percent, selected "sometimes" for Item 38. Parents
responded "often or always" 67.7 percent of the time on Item 44, "I listen and am
responsive to my child's critical comments about me or another adult (e.g., teacher)" (M
65
= 3.79, SD = .88). Parents responded "often or always" 33.4 percent of the time on Item
45, "I encourage critical comments from my child" (M = 3.30, SD = .95). Parents
responded "sometimes" 48.5 percent of the time on Item 45.
Table 4.5
Frequency Analysis for Authoritative Parental Style

%
_____________________________________ N/HE
Q.22
I often provoke or encourage oppositional

behavior from my child by such methods as
playing games, teasing, and challenging my 88.2
child to express his questions about my
scope of authority.
?/?
2.9
8.8
1.53 1.02
SD
Q.26
My child's day-to-day activities are

structured by my daily regimen and
adhered to with only rare exceptions.
42.4
45.5
12.1 2.73 0.98
Q.37
My child has one or more tasks to perform

which he/she does regularly without
8.8
44.1
47.1 3.50 0.93
I set regular tasks as a conscious part of my 5.9

childrearing policy because I value my
55.9
38.2 3.47 0.83
8.8
23.5
67.7 3.79 0.88
18.2
48.5
33.4 3.30 0.95
choice.
Q.38
child's work.
Q.44
I listen and am responsive to my child's

critical comments about me or another
adult (e.g., teacher).

Q.45
I encourage critical comments from my
child.
Table 4.5 shows that the majority of the parents indicated that they "often or
always" agreed with the statements in survey items 37 and 44. This accounted for the
highest mean and highest standard deviation in each: Item 37 (M = 3.50, SD = 0.93);
Item 38 (M = 3.47, SD = 0.83); Item 44 (M = 3.79, SD = 0.88), and Item 45 (M = 3.30,
66
SD = 0.95). Survey Items 22 and 26 indicated a mean less than 3. Item 22 indicated a
mean less than 2. Frequency analysis revealed that most parents reported "never or
hardly ever" on these items in the parent survey of Authoritative parental style.
Authoritarian Parental Style
The dimension of Authoritarian parental style consisted of five items on a 5-
point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were performed on each item in this dimension.
Table 4.6 presents the descriptive statistics for the five items in the dimension of
Authoritarian parental style. All five items had mean scores above 3.0 within the
"sometimes" and "often or always" ranges. Parents responded "often or always" 72.7
percent of the time on Item 20, "I teach my child to embrace the American dream; that
is, he/she defines success in life as possessing social status, and earning a good living"
(M = 3.97, SD = 1.29). Parents responded "often or always" 88.2 percent of the time on
Item 23, "I have a clear, well-developed image of the kind of person I want my child to
become in terms of personal characteristics" (M = 4.45, SD = 0.90). Parents responded
"often or always" 79.4 percent of the time on Item 27, "I am confident that I radiate
self-confidence in all that I say and do in my relationship with my child" (M = 3.91, SD
= 0.95). Parents responded "often or always" 52.9 percent of the time on Item 31, "I
value a well-structured regimen for the entire household" (M=3.67, SD = 0.85). Parents
responded "often or always" 50 percent of the time on Item 32, "I make consistent
efforts to see that high degree of structure is maintained" (M = 3.55, SD = 0.97).
Table 4.6 shows that the majority of the parents indicated that they either often
or always agree with the statements in all survey items: 20, 23, 27, 3 1 and 32. The
highest number of parents indicated that they either often or always agree with the
statement in item 23. This accounted for item 23 having the highest mean (M = 4.45, SD
67
= 0.90). Survey item 23 was the only survey item with a mean greater than 4.0 on the
items in the parent survey of Authoritarian parental style.
Table 4.6
Frequency Analysis for Authoritarian Parental Style

%
_____________________________________________N/HE
Q.20
I teach my child to embrace the American
?/?
SD
18.2
9.1
72.7 3.97 1.29
2.9
8.8
88.2 4.45 0.90
8.8
11.8 79.4 3.91 0.95
5.9
41.2 52.9 3.67 0.85
14.7
35.3 50.0 3.55 0.97
Dream; that is, he/she defines success in

life as possessing social status, and earning
a good living.
Q.23
I have a clear, well-developed image of the

kind of person I want my child to become
in terms of personal characteristics.
Q.27
I am confident that I radiate self-confidence

in all that I say and do in my relationship
with my child.
Q.31
I value a well-structured regiment for the

entire household.
Q.32 I make consistent efforts to see that high

________degree of structure is maintained.
_______N = Never, HE = Hardly Ever, S = Sometimes, O = Often, A = Always

The second research question asked parents of eighth-grade students to describe

their school-related parenting practices using four categories: Parenting, Volunteering,
Learning at Home and School Participation. Items in this section of the survey measured
school-related parenting practices using a 5-point Likert scale on which 1 = Never; 2 =
Hardly Ever; 3 = Sometimes; 4 = Often; and 5 = Always.
The question of school-related parenting practice was asked to determine which
school-related parenting practice could be used as a predictor of eighth grade student
68
proficiency or mastery level in mathematics standardized tests. Item analysis and

descriptive statistics were employed to answer this question.
Table 4.7 presents the descriptive statistics for the four school-related parenting
practices.
Table 4.7
Frequency Chart for Four School-Related Parenting Practices
_______________________Parenting
N
Valid
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Number of Items
School
-ing
Participation
Learning at Home
32
33
33
13.53
12.00
21.18
21.64
3.35
9.00
3.50
5.00
2.59
12.00
3.43
16.00
20.00
18.00
25.00
29.00
Missing
Mean
Volunteer
33
Table 4.7 shows that parents were sometimes in agreement that they were
involved in activities related to Parenting. This dimension of school-related parenting
practices consisted of four items. With a range of 4-20 and a mean score of 13.53,
parents agreed that their school-related parenting practice could sometimes be described
as Parenting. The Standard deviation for Parenting was 3.53. Volunteering consisted of
four items with a range of 4-20. The mean score for Volunteering was 12.00 indicating
that parents sometimes agreed that their parental style could best be described as
Volunteering The standard deviation for Volunteering was 3.50. School Participation
consisted of five items with a range of 5-25. The mean score for School Participation
was 21.18, which indicated that parents often agreed that their school-related parenting
practice was best described as School Participation. Standard deviation for School
Participation was 2.59. The dimension of Learning at Home consisted of six items with
69
a range of 6-30. The mean score for Learning at Home was 21.6, indicated that parents
sometimes agreed that their school-related parenting practice was best described as
Learning at Home. The standard deviation for Learning at Home was 3.43.
Tables 4.8, 4.9, 4.10 and 4.1 1 illustrate the item analysis of the four dimensions
of school-related parenting practices. In the dimension of Parenting (Table 4.8), each of
the four items reported a mean above 3.00. Item 16, "I monitor what my child reads,"
reported the highest mean with 3.81 and a standard deviation of 0.86. Almost two-thirds
of respondents, 64.7 percent, indicated that they "often or always" monitor what their
children read. Only 5.9 percent of the respondents answered "never" or "hardly ever" to
this item. Item 12, "I check my child's book bag for homework and notices," reported
the lowest mean score at 3.06 and a standard deviation of 1.29. The highest percent of
parents, 37.5, responded "never" or "hardly ever" on Item 12, while 40.6 percent
Table 4.8
Frequency Analysis for Parenting

%
_____________________________________________N/HE
Q.12
I check my child's book bag for homework
37.5
21.9
?/?
SD
40.6 3.06 1.29
and notices.
Q.13
I review and assist with homework.
20.6
32.4 47.1 3.47 1.08
Q.14
I read with my child.
23.5
38.2
Q. 1 6
I monitor what my child reads.
5.9
29.4 64.7 3.81 0.86
38.2 3.19 1.03
of parents indicated that they either "often" or "always" check their children's book bag
for homework. Item 13, "I review and assist with homework" had a mean score of 3.47
and a standard deviation of 1.08. While 47.1 percent of parents indicated that they often
70
or always review and assist their children with homework, 20.6 percent of the parents
responded "never" or "hardly ever" on the same item. Item 14, "I read with my child"
had a mean score of 3.19 and a standard deviation of 1.03. While 38.2 percent of parents
indicated that they "often" or "always" read with their children, 23.5 percent of the
responding parents indicated that they "never" or "hardly ever" read with their children.
An analysis of the items in the dimension of Volunteering is presented in Table
4.9. This dimension consisted of four items that were answered on a 5-point Likert
scale. Three of the items revealed a mean above 3.00. Item 6, "I help my child with
homework" revealed the greatest mean score at 3.64 and a standard deviation of 0.96.
Forty-seven percent of parents responded that they "often" or "always" helped their
children with homework and 41.2 percent of parents responded that they "sometimes"
help their children with homework. Item 5, "I volunteer in after-school programs,"
revealed the only mean score below 3.00 at 2.24 with a standard deviation of 1 .23.
Table 4.9
Frequency Analysis for Volunteering

%
_____________________________________________N/HE
?/?
SD
Q. 4
I volunteer in my child's classroom.
35.3
20.6 44.2 3.00 1.32
Q. 5
I volunteer in after-school programs.
50.0
35.3
Q. 6
I help my child with homework.
11.8
41.2 47.0 3.64 0.96
Q. 9
I accompany my child's class on field trips. 21.2
39.4 39.4 3.12 1.17
14.7 2.24 1.23

Parents responded that they "never" or "hardly ever" volunteered in after-school
programs 50 percent of the time on Item 5. Only 14.7 percent of parents said they
71
"often" or "always" volunteered in after-school programs. Parents responded "often" or

"always" on Item 4 "I volunteer in my child's classroom" 44.2 percent of the times. The
mean score for Item 4 was 3.00 and the standard deviation was 1 .32. Parents responded
35.3 percent of the times that they "never" or "hardly ever" always" volunteered in their
children's classroom.
Table 4. 10
Frequency Analysis for Learning at Home

%
_____________________________________________N/HE
?/?
SD
Q. 11
I play formal education games at home

with my child.
52.9
32.4
14.7 2.55 0.83
Q.15
I take my child to the library.
17.6
32.4
50.0 3.55 1.06
Q.39
I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's

level of competence.
5.9
32.4
61.7 3.70 0.92
Q.46
I am seeking to develop my child's verbal
3.0
18.2 78.8 4.12 0.82
and reasoning abilities.

Q.47
I consistently engage my child in

intellectually meaningful discussions.
0.0
20.6
79.5 4.15 0.71
Q.48
I help my child with homework.
5.9
47.1
47.1 3.58 0.87
An analysis of the items in the dimension of Learning at Home is presented in

Table 4.10. This dimension consisted of six items that were answered on a 5-point
Likert scale. Five of the items revealed a mean above 3.00. Item 47, "I consistently
engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions," revealed the greatest mean

score at 4.15 and a standard deviation of 0.71. No parent reported "never" or "hardly
ever" on this item while 75.9 percent of the parents responded that they "often" or
72
"always" consistently engage their children in intellectually meaningful discussions.

Parents responded 52.9 percent of the times that they "never" or "hardly ever" on Item
1 1, "I play formal education games at home with my child." Item 1 1 revealed the lowest
mean score and the only mean score below 3.00 at 2.55, and a standard deviation of 0.83
in this dimension. Only 14.7 percent of parents responded that they "often" or "always"
play formal education games with their children. Parents responded "often" or "always"
50 percent of the times on Item 15, "I take my child to the library". Item 15 revealed a
mean score of 3.55 and a standard deviation of 1.06. However, 17 percent of parents
responded "never" or "hardly ever" to taking their children to the library.
Table 4.11
Frequency Analysis for School Participation

%
____________________________________________N/HE
?/?
2.9
2.9
94.1
4.55 0.71
Q. 8
I participate in parent/teacher conferences. 5.9
8.8
85.2
4.42 1.00
Q.10
I participate in school fundraisers.
5.9
35.3
58.8
3.73 0.98
My child and I participate in school-
3.0
36.4
60.6
3.76 0.79
0.0
0.0
100.0 4.73 0.45
Q..7
I attend night performances, programs, or
SD
assemblies.
Q.17
related activities.
Q.18
My child and I talk about school.

An analysis of the items in the dimension of School Participation is presented in
Table 4.1 1. This dimension consisted of five items that were answered on a 5 -point
Likert scale. All five of the items revealed a mean above 3.00. Three of the five items:
Item 7, "I attend night performances, programs, or assemblies" (M = 4.55, SD = .71);
73
Item 8, "I participate in parent/teacher conferences" (M = 4.42, SD = 1.00); and Item

18, "My child and I talk about school" (M = 4.73, SD = .45), recorded mean scores
above 4.0. The majority of the respondents indicated "often" or "always" to all the items
in the dimension of School Participation. Parents responded "often" or "always" 94.1
percent of the times on Item 7. Parents responded "often" or "always" 85.2 percent of
the times on Item 8. Parents responded "often" or "always" 58.8 percent of the times on
Item 10 and another 35.3 percent responded that they "sometimes" participate in school
fundraisers. Parents responded "often" or "always" 60.6 percent of the times on Item 17,
"My child and I participate in school-related activities." Another 36.4 percent ofparents
responded that they sometimes participate in school-related activities with their
children. Parents responded "often" or "always" 100 percent of the times on Item 18 to
talking with their children about school.
Research question three examined whether there was a difference between male
and female students in their dispositions of self-concept, academic self-concept and
anger control. This question was answered using individual sample Mest.
Table 4.12 displays the independent Mest results comparing male and female
students' reported dispositions of self-concept, academic self-concept, and anger control
based on the students' responses on the student survey. There were 1 1 boys and 23 girls.
Due to the wide margin between boys and girls, Types I and II tests were performed. No
errors were found.
74
Table 4.12
Independent Sample /-test Results Comparing Students' Reports by Gender and

Students' Dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control
Items
Mean
Std.
df
Males
11
8.64
Deviation
2.77
0.197
32
0.845
23
11
23
8.43
8.36
7.96
2.81
2.01
1.85
0.585
32
0.563
Females
Males
Females
Females
Males
22
11
12.18
8.68
2^10
5.95
1.89
Gender
SelfConcept
6
AcademicSelC
AngerCon
11.27 0.084
The independent sample /-test results revealed that there were no statistically
significant differences in scores for males (M = 8.64, SD = 2.77) and the scores for
females (M= 8.43, SD = 2.81; /(32) = .197, ? = .845 in the disposition of Self-Concept;
and (M= 8.36, SD = 2.01) formales and (M= 7.96, SD = 1.85; /(32) = .57, ? = .563) for
males and females respectively in the disposition of Academic Self-Concept . There
were no statistically significant differences between males and females in both SelfConcept and Academic Self-Concept. There was a slight but not statistically significant
difference in scores for males and females in the disposition of Anger Control (M =
12.18, SD = 5.95) for males and (M= 8.68, SD = 2.10; (31) = 1.89,p = .084) for
females in the disposition of anger control. One female student omitted an answer to this
question (N = 22). The resulting difference recorded here was not statistically
significant (p = .084).
Table 4.13 shows that the majority of students indicated that they "never" or
"hardly ever" agreed with the statements in survey items for Self-Concept. Only 5.9
percent of the students responded in the "often" or "always" categories. The 5.9 percent
"often" or "always" responses were for Item 1 1, "I lack self-confidence." Item 1 1 also
75
received the highest percentage response in the "sometimes" category. Students' overall
responses for this disposition indicated that they had a high level of Self-Concept.
Table 4.13
Item Analysis for Self-Concept

%
%
S
%
O/A
N/HE
SD
q7
I don't have much respect for myself
97.1
2.9
0.0
1.24
0.50
q8
I have very negative feelings about

myself,
I lack self-confidence.
88.2
11.8
0.0
1.47
0.71
76.5
17.6
5.9
1.74
0.96
ql4 I don't do things that are important.
94.1
5.9
0.0
1.29
0.58
ql 6 I am never in a good mood.
97.1
2.9
0.0
1.53
0.56
q 1 7 I am not of all accepting of myself.
97.1
2.9
0.0
1.24
0.50
ql 1
Table 4.14
Item Analysis for Academic Self-Concept

%
N/HE
%
S
%
?/?
SD
ql 5 I have trouble with most academic

subjects.
91.2
5.9
2.9
1.47
0.75
ql9 I get bad marks in most academic

subjects
88.2
11.8
0.0
1.47
0.71
q21
73.5
20.6
5.8
2.00
0.98
I hate most academic subjects.
"hardly ever" agreed with the statements in survey items for Academic Self-Concept.
76
Twenty point six percent of the students indicated that they sometimes "hate most
academic subjects," (Item 21). Students' overall responses for this disposition indicated
that they had a high level of Academic Self-Concept.
"hardly ever" agreed with the statements in survey items for Anger Control. Students'
responded "sometimes" to Item 6, "I easily get really mad," 18.2 percent of the times.
Students' responded "sometimes" to Item 10, "I yell at others when I get angry" 25.3
percent of the times. Students responded overall that they were in control of their anger.
Students' response on Anger Control had a lower response percentage in the "never" or
"hardly ever" category than responses in the same category on Self-Concept and
Academic Self-Concept. Overall the majority of students indicated that they were in
control of their anger most of the time.
Table 4. 15
Item Analysis for Anger Control
ql
I often feel like I might lose control of
%
S
%
O/A
N/HE
SD
85.3
11.8
2.9
1.73
0.91
my anger
q3
I take out my anger unfairly on others.
85.3
11.8
2.9
1.64
0.78
q6
I easily get really mad.
78.8
18.2
3.0
1.73
0.88
qlO I yell at others when I get angry.
73.5
23.5
2.9
1.91
0.88
ql 8 I am willing to have a physical fight to

prove I'm right.
88.2
5.9
5.8
1.42
0.97
q23 I easily become so upset that I have to hit
88.2
8.8
2.9
1.42
0.87
______something.
77

How do parents of male and female eighth grade students differ in their schoolrelated parenting practices of Parenting, Volunteering, Learning at Home, and School
Participation; their parental styles of Permissive, Authoritative, and Authoritarian; and
students' groupings in Level 3 and 4 in mathematics?
Research question four examined the mean difference of the dimensions of
parental styles, school related parenting practices, student dispositions of self-concept,
academic self-concept, and anger control based on students' proficiency in mathematics.
A test of individual means (Mest) was used to answer this inquiry.
Table 4.16 shows the independent sample Mest results for research question
four. The results of the independent sample /-test showed that there were no statistically
significant difference in scores for the dimensions of Volunteering, School Participation,
Authoritarian, Permissive, Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control for
eighth-grade students who received Levels 3 and 4 on their standardized mathematics
test. There was a slight; albeit not statistically significant, difference in score for the
dimensions of Learning at Home (p = .069) and Authoritative parental style (p = .063).
The independent sample Mest showed a significant difference in scores for the
dimension of Parenting in students receiving Level 3 (M = 15.19, SD = 3.54) and
students receiving Level 4 (M = 1 1.88, SD = 2.19; t (24.98) = 3.18,/? = .004) on their
2008 eighth-grade standardized mathematics test. Students who received Level 3 came
from homes in which more parents described their school-related parenting practice as
Parenting. Parenting is the application of proper child-rearing skills that promote

attention to the child's health and safety needs. This includes the provision of adequate
supervision, attention to discipline, the provision of a home environment conducive to
78
the school-aged child's academic achievement, establishment of rules to guide the child
in making responsible decision and the provision of punishment to promote age
appropriate behaviors (Epstein, 1995).
Table 4.16
Independent Sample -test Results Comparing Reports of Parental Styles, School

Related Parenting Practices, Students' Dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic SelfConcept, and Anger Control; and Performance Level on Mathematics Examinations
Math Levels
Mean
StcL
_________________________________________Deviation
Parenting
~p
3?
16
15.19
3^54
4.0
16
11.88
2.19
Volunteer
3.0
16
12.94
3.91
1.52
31
0.138
SchoolPar
4.0
3.0
4.0
17
16
17
11.12
21.19
21.18
2.91
1.83
3.21
0.01
31
0.990
Learnhome
3.0
16
22.75
3.53
1.88
31
0.069
Authoritaria
4.0
3.0
4.0
17
17
16
20.59
20.00
19.06
3.06
3.55
2.84
0.83
31
0.411
-0.61
31
0.544
1.93
30
0.063
0.06
32
0.952
Permissiv
Authoritative
SelfConcep
AcademicSelfC
AngerCon
3.0
17
13.18
3.19
4.0
16
13.81
2.74
3.0
15
19.27
4.27
4.0
17
17.06
1.89
38
df
24.98 0.004
3.0
17
8.53
2.76
4.0
17
8.47
2.83
3.0
4.0
17
17
8.35
7.82
1.93
1.85
0.82
32
0.420
3.0
17
9.94
5.04
0.13
31
0.896
4.0
16
9.75
2.93
Table 4.16 revealed three dimensions that indicated some levels of significance
to student performance on the 2008 eighth-grade mathematics examination. Schoolrelated parenting practices of Parenting and Learning at Home reveal some significance.
The dimension of Parenting revealed a strong statistical significance (p = .004).
Learning at Home (p = .069) and Authoritative parental style (p = .063) revealed a

slight, though not statistically significant relationship to student performance on the
79
2008 eighth-grade mathematics examination in this suburban Long Island middle

school. Table 4.17 to 4.19 display split files for the dimensions of Parenting, Learning at
Home, Authoritative parental style, and students' achievement groupings (Level 3,
proficiency; and Level 4, Mastery).
The dimension of Parenting accounted for the only statistically significant
relationship to student performance level on the eighth-grade 2008 mathematics

examinations. Tables 4.17.1 and 4.17.2 display detailed descriptions on the strength of
the relationship by the performance level. With a minimum of 9 and a maximum of 20,
parents whose children performed at Level 3 (proficiency level) had a mean score of
15.19. Parents whose children performed at Level 4 (mastery level) had a minimum
score of 9 and a maximum of 17. These parents had a mean score of 1 1.88.
Table 4.17.1
Split Files for Achievement Groupings and Students' Performance Levels Based on the
Dimensions of Parenting Level 3
Descriptive Statistics3
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Math
17
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
Parenting
16
9.00
20.00
15.19
3.54
Valid N
16
(listwise)
a. Math = 3.00
The statistical significance of the dimension of Parenting correlated to students
who received Level 3 on their eighth grade mathematics examinations in 2008 in this
suburban Long Island middle school.
80
Table 4.17.2
Dimensions of Parenting Level 4
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Math
17
4.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
Parenting
16
9.00
17.00.
11.88
2.19
Valid N
16
(listwise)
a. Math = 4.00
Table 4.18.1
Dimensions of Learning at Home Level 3
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Math
17
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
Learnhome
16
17.00
29.00
22.75
3.53
Valid N
16
(listwise)
a. Math = 3.00
Table 4.18.2
Dimensions of Learning at Home Level 4
Descriptive Statistics*
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Math
17
4.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
Learnhome
17
16.00
26.00
20.59
3.06
Valid N
17
(listwise)
a. Math = 4.00
81
Tables 4.18.1 and 4.18.2 illustrate the split dimension of Learning at Home,
which accounted for a slight but not statistically significant relationship to student
performance level. With a minimum of 17 and a maximum of 29, parents whose

children performed at Level 3 (proficiency level) had a mean score of 22.75. Parents
whose children performed at Level 4 (mastery level) had a minimum score of 16 and a
maximum of 26. These parents had a mean score of 20.59.
Table 4.19.1
Dimensions of Authoritative Parental Style Level 3
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Math
17
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
Authoritative
15
15.00
30.00
19.27
4.27
Valid N
15
(listwise)
a. Math = 3.00
Table 4.19.2
Dimensions of Authoritative Parental Style Level 4
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Math
17
4.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
Authoritative
17
14.00
20.00
17.06
1.89
Valid N
17
(listwise)
a. Math = 4.00
Tables 4.19.1 and 4.19.2 illustrate the split dimension of Authoritative parental
style which accounted for a slight but not statistically significant relationship to student
82
performance level. With a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 30, parents whose

children performed at Level 3 (proficiency level) had a mean score of 19.27. Parents
whose children performed at Level 4 (mastery level) had a minimum score of 14 and a
maximum of 20. These parents had a mean score of 17.06.
Research Question five asked what relationships exist among parenting practices
of Parenting, School Participation, Learning at Home, and Volunteering; Students
dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept, and Anger Control; and parental
styles of Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student proficiency level on
the eighth-grade mathematics examinations in 2007-2008 school year? Research
question five was answered through the use of correlation analysis.
Table 4.20 shows that there were 12 correlations among the school-related
parenting practices of Parenting, School Participation, Learning at Home, and
Volunteering; Students' dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and
Anger Control; and parental styles of Authoritarian, Authoritative, and Permissive and
student proficiency levels on the eighth-grade mathematics examinations in 2007-2008
school year. The following are all the positive correlations that emanated from this
study: Parenting and mathematics proficiency level, Parenting and Volunteering,
Parenting and Learning at Home, Parenting and Permissive parental style, Parenting and
Authoritative parental style, Volunteering and School Participation, Volunteering and
Learning at Home, School Participation and Learning at Home, Learning at Home and
Authoritarian parental style, Learning at Home and Permissive parental style, Learning
at Home and Authoritative parental style and Learning at Home and Academic Self-
Concept. Each correlation was addressed separately.
83
Table 4.20
Correlation Matrix for Parental Styles, Parenting Practices, Student Dispositions, and
Proficiency Level on Mathematics Examinations
Correlations
School Learn
Self Academic Anger
Math Parenting Volunteer Part home Authoritarian Permissive Authoritative Concept SelCon Con
Math
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Parenting
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Volunteer
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
School Part
33
.990
.399
.001
33
31
33
33
-.320
.674"
.398'
.394'
.069
.000
.024
.026
33
31
32
32
33
-.148
.281
.191
.113
.392
.411
.126
.296
.537
.026
33
31
32
32
32
33
Pearson
Correlation
.109
-.432
-.143
-.088 -.560"
-.234
Sig. (2-tailed)
.544
.015
.436
.631
.001
33
31
32
32
32
32
33
-.333
.451-
.240
-.113 .534"
.040
-.145
.063
.012
.193
.545
.002
.831
.437
32
30
31
31
32
31
31
32
-.011
-.193
-.077
.017 -.247
.193
.271
-.167
.952
.291
.672
.924
.282
.127
.362
Pearson
Correlation
Pearson
Correlation
N
N
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Academic
Self Concept
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Anger Concept
.002
.558"
Sig. (2-tailed)
Self Concept
.138
31
Authoritative
32
.524"
.157
Sig. (2-tailed)
Permissive
32
-.264
-.002
Pearson
Correlation
N
Authoritarian
.003
33
Sig. (2-tailed)
Learn Home
34
-.502"
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.165
.198
34
32
33
33
33
33
33
32
34
-.143
.228
-.094
.004
.359
.116
.045
.185
-.050
.420
.210
.603
.982
.040
.521
.804
.311
.780
34
32
33
33
33
33
33
32
34
34
-.024
.137
.172
.215 -.060
.116
-.199
-.158
.280
-.186
.896
.463
.346
.236
.746
.528
.275
.396
.114
.300
33
31
32
32
32
32
32
31
33
33
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
33
84
Table 4.21 shows the correlation between Parenting and students achievement
on the 2008 eighth-grade New York State mathematics examination in a suburban Long
Island middle school. The dimension of Parenting (r = -.502,/? = .003) accounted for 25
percent of the variance on student performance at Level 3, or proficiency level. There
was no significant correlation between Parenting and student performance at Level 4, or
mastery level of the 2008 mathematics examination with this group of eighth-grade
students. Parenting was the only dimension in this study that showed any correlation to
student mathematics scores.
There were 1 1 other correlations among the school-related parenting practices,

parental styles, and student dispositions that were noteworthy, even though they did not
show any direct correlations to student performance levels in mathematics among this
group of eighth-grade students.
Table 4.21
Correlation Chart for Parenting and Mathematics

Correlations
Parenting Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Math
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
_________N
Parenting
1
Math
-.502
.003
32
32
-.502
.003
32
34

Table 4.22 presents the positive correlation between the school-related parenting
practices of Parenting and Volunteering (r = .524, ? = .002). The dimensions of
Parenting accounted for 27 percent of the variance on Volunteering. Further analysis of
85
the correlation between Parenting and Volunteering was conducted between the
individual items in the dimension of Volunteering and the school-related practice of
Parenting.
Table 4.22
Correlation Chart Parenting and Volunteering

Correlations
Parenting
Parenting
Pearson Correlation
Volunteer
.524
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Volunteering
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.002
32
31
.524
.002
3J
33_
Table 4.23 presents the correlations between the individual items in

Volunteering and the school-related parenting practice of Parenting. Item 5 in the
school-related parenting practice of Volunteering, "I volunteer in after school programs"
showed a positive correlation with the school-related parenting practice of Parenting (r =
.467, ? = .008). Item 5 accounted for 22 percent of the variance for the school-related
practice of Parenting. Item 6 in the school-related practice of Volunteering, "I help my
child with homework" showed a very strong positive correlation with the school related
practice of Parenting (r = .780, ? < .001). Item 6 accounted for 61 percent of the
variance for the school-related practice Parenting. Item 4 in the school-related practice
Volunteering, "I volunteer in my child's classroom," showed a strong positive
correlation with Item 5, "I volunteer in after school programs" (r = .660, ? < .001). Item
4 accounted for 44 percent of the variance for item 5. Item 4 also showed a strong
86
positive correlation with Item 9 in the school-related practice of Volunteering "I

accompany my child's class on field trips" (r = .729, ? < .001). Item 4 accounted for 53
percent of the variance for Item 9.
Table 4.23
Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the School Related Parenting Practice of
Volunteering and the School Related Parenting Practice of Parenting
Correlations
Volunteering Items
Parenting
Parenting
q4
q5
q6
q9
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q4
32
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q5
32
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q6
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q9
.342
.055
.464
34
.660
.008
.000
32
34
34
.103
.321
.000
.562
.064
32
34
34
34
.372*
.013
.780
Pearson Correlation
.030
Sig. (2-tailed)
.872
.000
.033
.944
31
33
33
33
.729
33

Table 4.24 presents the positive correlation between the school-related

parenting practices of Parenting and Learning at Home (r = .674,/ < .001). The
dimensions of Learning at Home accounted for 45 percent of the variance on Parenting.

Further analysis of the correlation between Learning at Home and Parenting was
87
conducted between the individual items in the dimension of Learning at Home and the
school-related parenting practice of Parenting.
Table 4.24
Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Learning at Home and Parenting

Correlations
Parenting
Parenting
Pearson Correlation
Learnhorae
.674
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
32
31
.674
.000
31
33_
Table 4.25 presents the correlations between the individual items in Learning at
Home and the school-related parenting practice of Parenting. Items 1 1, 15, 39, 47 and
48 all show positive correlation with the school-related practice Parenting. Item 1 1 , "I
play formal education games at home with my child," showed a positive correlation
with the school-related parenting practice of Parenting (r = .436, ? = .013). Item 1 1
accounted for 19 percent of the variance for the school-related practice Parenting. Item
15, "I take my child to the library" (r = .477, ? = .006) accounted for 23 percent of the
variance for the school-related practice of Parenting. Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks
to raise my child's level of competence," (r = .508, ? = .003) accounted for 26 percent
of the variance for the school-related practice of Parenting. Item 47, "I consistently
engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions" (r = .357, ? = .045) accounted
for 13 percent of the variance for the school-related practice of Parenting. Item 48, "I
help my child with homework" (r=.598,/><.001) accounted for 36 percent of the
88
variance for the school-related practice of Parenting.

Table 4.25
Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the School-Related Parenting Practice of

Learning at Home and the School Related Parenting Practice of Parenting
Correlations
Learning at Home Items

Parenting
Parenting
qll
ql5
q39
q46
q47
q48
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
qll
Pearson
32
.436*
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql5
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q39
Pearson
.013
32
.477
34
.473**
.006
.005
32
34
34
.508**
.349*
.307
.003
.043
.077
32
34
34
34
.225
.266
.137
.092
.223
.134
.448
.611
31
33
33
33
.357*
.392*
.045
.022
.143
.002
.001
32
34
34
34
33
34
.598**
.342*
.306
.233
.162
.306
.000
.047
.079
.185
.366
.079
32
34
34
34
33
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q46
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q47
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q48
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
33
.257 .513** .556**

Table 4.25 also showed additional correlations between individual items in the
dimension of school-related practice Learning at Home. Item 1 1 , "I play formal
34
89
education games at home with my child," correlated positively with Item 15, "I take my
child to the library;" Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's level of
competence;" Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful
discussions;" and Item 48, "I help my child with homework." Item 39, "I believe in
setting tasks to raise my child's level of competence" correlated positively with Item 47,
"I consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions. Item 46, "I am
seeking to develop my child's verbal and reasoning abilities" correlated positively with
Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions."
practices of Parenting and the parental style Permissive (r = -.432, ? = .015).
Table 4.26
Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Parenting and Permissive Parental Style
Correlations
Parenting
Parenting
Pearson Correlation
Permissive
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Permissive
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
____________N
-.432
.015
32
-.432
31
1
.015
31
33_
The dimensions of Permissive parental style accounted for 19 percent of the
variance on Parenting. Further analysis of the correlation between Permissive parental

style and Parenting was conducted between the individual items in the dimension of
Permissive parental style and the school-related parenting practice of Parenting.
90
Table 4.27
Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the Parental Style Permissive and the
School-Related Parenting Practice of Parenting
Correlations
Permissive Parental Style Items

Parenting q21
Parenting
Pearson
q35
q40
q41
q42
q43
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q21
Pearson
32
-.282
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q35
Pearson
.118
32
34
-.196
.056
.283
.754
32
34
34
-.296
-.043
.193
.100
.810
.273
32
34
34
34
-.387*
.319
.551**
.465**
.031
.071
.001
.006
31
33
33
33
33
-.126
-.096
.210
-.045
.163
.494
.589
.234
.799
.365
32
34
34
34
33
-.155
.268
-.025
.004
.099 .362*
.396
.125
.886
.981
.583
.035
32
34
34
34
33
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q40
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q41
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q42
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q43
Pearson
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
__________N

34
91
Table 4.27 presents the correlations between the individual items in Permissive parental
style and the school-related parenting practice of Parenting. Items 41, "I prefer to let my
child watch what he/she wants to on television on the principle that my child should
choose his/her own intellectual content" was the only item in the dimension of
Permissive parental style that showed a negative correlation with Parenting (r = -.387, ?
= .031). Item 41 contributed 15 percent of the variance on Parenting. The more parents
allowed their children to watch what the children wanted rather than parents assisting
them in making their selection, the less parents exhibited the school-related parenting
skill of Parenting.
dimension of Permissive parental style. Item 41 also showed correlations with Item 35,
"My child is allowed to visit freely with friends in the neighborhood" (r = .551,/? =
.001). Item 41 contributed 30 percent of the variance on Item 35. Item 41 also correlated
positively with Item 40, "I prefer to let my child choose his/her own reading material" (r
= .465,/ = .006). Item 41 contributed 22 percent of the variance on Item 40. Item 42, "I
do not believe that my child should have to put his toys away and clean up his/her own
mess," correlated positively with Item 43, "I willingly clean up after my child and I do
not insist that he/she helps" (r = .365, ? = .035). Item 42 contributed 13 percent of the
variance on Item 43.
practices of Parenting and the parental style Authoritative (r = A5\,p = .012). The
dimension of Authoritative parental style accounted for 20 percent of the variance on
Parenting. Further analysis of the correlation between Authoritative parental style and
Parenting was conducted between the individual items in the dimension of Authoritative
parental style and the school-related parenting practice of Parenting.

Table 4.28
Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Parenting and Authoritative Parental Style
Correlations
Parenting
Pearson Correlation
Parenting
Authoritative
.451*
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Authoritative Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)
___________N
.012
32
30
.45 1 *
.012
30
32_

Authoritative parental style and the school-related parenting practice of Parenting. Items
22, 38 and 45 revealed correlations with Parenting. Item 22, "I often provoke or
encourage oppositional behavior from my child by such methods as playing games,
teasing and challenging my child to express his/her questions about my scope of
authority" (r = .404, ? = .022) accounted for 16 percent of the variance on Parenting.
Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious part of my childrearing policy because I
value my child's work," (r = .469, ? = .007) accounted for 22 percent of the variance on
Parenting. Item 45, "I encourage critical comments from my child," (r = .367, ? = .042)
accounted for 13 percent of the variance on Parenting.
Table 4.29 also shows additional correlations between individual items in the
dimension of parental style Authoritative. Item 22 correlated positively with Item 26,
"My child's day-to-day activities are structured by my daily regimen and adhered to
with only rare exceptions" (r = .378,/ = .030). Item 22 accounted for 14 percent of the
93
variance on Item 26. Item 22 correlated with Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious
part of my childrearing policy because I value my child's level of competence" (r =

.414,/? = .010).
Table 4.29
Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the Parental Style of Authoritative and
the School Related Parenting Practice of Parenting
Correlations
Authoritative Parental Style Items
____________________________Parenting
Parenting
Pearson
q22
q26
q37
q38
q44
q45
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q22
Pearson
32
.404*
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q26
Pearson
.022
32
34
.212
.378*
.252
.030
31
33
33
.223
.319
.145
.221
.066
.422
32
34
33
.469**
.414*
.275 .435*
.007
.015
.121
.010
32
34
33
34
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q37
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q38
Pearson
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q44
Pearson
.231
.361* -.044
.130
.304
Sig. (2-tailed)
.204
.036
.810
.465
.080
32
34
33
34
34
.367*
.399*
.129
.040
.215 .519**
.042
.022
.483
.824
.229
.002
31
33
32
33
33
33
Correlation
q45
Pearson
1
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
__________N

33
94
Item 22 accounted for 17 percent of the variance on Item 38. Item 37, "My child has one
or more tasks to perform which he/she does regularly without choice," correlated
positively with Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious part of my childrearing policy
because I value my child's level of competence" (r = .435, ? = .015). Item 37 accounted
for 19 percent of the variance on Item 38. Item 22 correlated positively with Item 44, "I
listen and am responsive to my child's critical comments about me or another adult
(e.g., teacher)" (r = .361, ? = .036). Item 22 accounted for 13 percent of the variance on
Item 44. Item 22 also correlated positively to item 45, "I encourage critical comments
from my child," (r = .399, ? = .022). Item 22 accounted for 16 percent of Item 45.
Table 4.30
Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Volunteering and School Participation

Correlations
Volunteer
Volunteer
Pearson Correlation
SchoolPart
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
SchoolPart
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
__________N
.558
.001
33
33
.558
.001
33
33_
practices of Volunteering and School Participation (r = .558, ? = .001). The dimension
of Volunteering accounted for 31 percent of the variance on School Participation.
Further analysis of the correlation between the school-related parenting practices of
Volunteering and School Participation was conducted between the individual items in
95
the school-related parenting practice of School Participation and the dimension of

Volunteering.
Table 4.31
Volunteering and the School Related Parenting Practice of School Participation

Correlations
School Participation Items
__________________________Volunteer
Volunteer
Pearson
Correlation
q7
q8
qlO
ql7
ql8
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q7
Pearson
33
.414
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q8
Pearson
.017
33
34
.491"
.418*
.004
.014
33
34
34
.210
.046
.221
.240
.796
.208
33
34
34
34
.541**
.575**
.489**
.275
.001
.000
.004
.121
33
33
33
33
33
.059
.291
.135
-.027
.333
.743
.095
.448
.880
.058
33
34
34
34
33
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
qlO
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql7
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql8
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
__________N
34

Table 4.3 1 presents the correlations between the individual items in School
participation and the school-related parenting practice of Volunteering. Items 7, 8 and
17 revealed positive correlations with Volunteering. Item 7, "I attend night programs
96
or assemblies" (r = .414, ? = .017) accounted for 17 percent of the variance on

Volunteering. Item 8, "I participate in parent/teacher conferences" (r = A9\,p = .004)
accounted for 24 percent of the variance on Volunteering. Item 17, "My child and I
participate in school-related activities" (r = .541, ? = .001) accounted for 29 percent of
the variance on Volunteering.
Table 4.31 also showed additional positive correlations between individual items
in the school-related parenting practice School Participation. Item 7, "I attend night
performances, programs or assemblies," correlated with Item 8, "I participate in
parent/teacher conferences" (r = .418, ? = .014). Item 7 accounted for 17 percent of the
variance on Item 8. Item 7 had a strong correlation with Item 17, "My child and I
participate in school-related activities" (r = .575, ? < .001). Item 7 accounted for 33
percent of the variance on Item 17. Item 8 had a strong correlation with Item 17 (r =.
489, ? = .004). Item 8 accounted for 24 percent of the variance on Item 17.
Table 4.32
Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of Volunteering and Learning at Home

Participation
Correlations
Volunteer
Pearson Correlation
Volunteer
Learnhome
.398*
.024
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Learnhome
33
32
Pearson Correlation
398*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.024
32
3_3_
. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
97
practices of Volunteering and Learning at Home (r = .398,/ = .024). The dimensions of

Volunteering accounted for 16 percent of the variance on Learning at Home.
Table 4.33
Learning at Home, and the School-Related Parenting Practice of Volunteering
Correlations

Volunteer
Volunteer Pearson Correlation
qll
ql5
q39
q46
q47
q48
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql 1
Pearson Correlation
.290
Sig. (2-tailed)
.101
ql5
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
34
34
Pearson Correlation
.353*
.349*
.307
Sig. (2-tailed)
.044
.043
.077
33
34
34
34
Pearson Correlation
.195
.266
.137
.092
Sig. (2-tailed)
.285
.134
.448
.611
32
33
33
33
Pearson Correlation
.471**
33
.392* .257 .513** .556**
.006
.022
.143
.002
.001
33
34
34
34
33
34
Pearson Correlation
.238
.342*
.306
.233
.162
.306
Sig. (2-tailed)
.182
.047
.079
.185
.366
.079
33
34
34
34
33
34
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q48
-.033 .473**
33
q47
34
.005
q46
33
.856
q39
33
34

Further analysis of the correlation between Volunteering and Learning at Home was
98
conducted between the individual items in the school-related parenting practices of

Volunteering and Learning at Home.
Table 4.33 presents the correlations between the individual items in the schoolrelated parenting practice of Learning at Home, and the school-related parenting
practice of Parenting. Items 39 and 47 revealed positive correlations with Volunteering.
Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's level of competence," (r = .353,/?
= .044) accounted for 12 percent of the variance on Volunteering. Item 47, "I
consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions," (r = All, ? =
.006) accounted for 22 percent of the variance on Volunteering.
in the school-related parenting practice Learning at Home. Item 1 1, "I play formal
education games at home with my child" correlated with Itemi 5, "I take my child to the
library" (r = .473, ? = .005). Item 1 1 accounted for 22 percent of the variance on Item
15. Item 1 1 correlated with Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's level
of competence" (r = .349, ? = .043). Item 1 1 accounted for 12 percent of the variance on

Item 39. Item 11, correlated with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in
intellectually meaningful discussions" (r = .392, ? = .022). Item 1 1 accounted for 15

percent of the variance on Item 47. Item 1 1 also correlated with Item 48, "I help my
child with homework" (r = .342, ? = .047). Item 1 1 accounted for 12 percent of the
variance on Item 48. Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's level of
competence," correlated with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually
meaningful discussions" (r = .513, ? = .002). Item 39 accounted for 26 percent of Item
47. Item 46, "I am seeking to develop my child's verbal and reasoning abilities," had a
very strong correlation with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually
99
meaningful discussions" (r = .556, ? = .001). Item 46 accounted for 31 percent of the

variance on Item 47.
practices of School Participation and Learning at Home (r = .394, ? = .026). The
dimensions of Learning at Home accounted for 16 percent of the variance on School
Participation. Further analysis of the correlation between Learning at Home and School
Participation was conducted between the individual items in the dimension of Learning
at Home and the dimension of School Participation.
Table 4.34
Correlation Chart for the Dimensions of School Participation and Learning at Home
Correlations
SchoolPart
SchoolPart
Pearson Correlation
Learnhome
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
___________N
.394
.026
33
32
.394
.026
32
33_
Table 4.35 presents the correlations between the individual items in the schoolrelated parenting practice of Learning at Home, and the school-related parenting
practice of School Participation. Item 1 1 , "I play formal education games at home with
my child" was the only item in the dimension of Learning at Home that showed a
correlations with School Participation (r = .429, ? = .005). Item 1 1 accounted for 18
percent of the variance on School Participation.
100
in the dimension of Learning at Home. Item 1 1 correlated with Item 15, "I take my child
to the library" (r = .473,/? = .005). Item 1 1 accounted for 22 percent of the variance on
Item 15.
Table 4.35
Learning at Home and the School-Related Parenting Practice of School Participation

Correlations
SchoolPart
SchoolPart

ql5
q39 q46 q47
qll
q48
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql 1
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql5
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q39
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q46
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q47
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q48
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
33
.429*
.013
33
34
.216 .473"
.227
.005
33
34
34
.167 .349*
.307
.352
.043
.077
33
34
34
34
.164
.266
.137
.092
.369
.134
.448
.611
32
33
33
33
.298
.392
1
33
.257 .513** .556**
.092
.022
.143
.002
.001
33
34
34
34
33
34
.233
.342*
.306
.233
.162
.306
.192
.047
.079
.185
.366
.079
33
34
34
34
33
34
1
34

Item 1 1 correlated with Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's
level of competence" (r = .349, ? - .043). Item 1 1 accounted for 12 percent of the

variance on Item 39. Item 11, correlated with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child
101
in intellectually meaningful discussions" (r = .392, ? = .022). Item 1 1 accounted for 15
percent of the variance on Item 47. Item 1 1 correlated with Item 48, "I help my child
with homework" (r = .342,/? = .047). Item 1 1 accounted for 12 percent of the variance
on Item 48. Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's level of competence"
correlated with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful
discussions" (r = .513,/? = .002). Item 39 accounted for 26 percent of Item 47. Item 46,
"I am seeking to develop my child's verbal and reasoning abilities," correlated with
Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions" (r =
.556,p = .001). Item 46 accounted for 3 1 percent of the variance of Item 7.
Table 4.36
Correlation Chart for the School-Related Parenting Practice Learning at Home and
Parental Style Authoritarian
Correlations
Learnhome
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Authoritarian
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Authoritarian Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
____________N
.392
.026
33
.392
32
1
.026
32
33_
Table 4.36 presents the correlation between the school-related parenting
practices of Learning at Home and the parental style Authoritarian (r = .392, ? = .026).
The dimensions of Authoritarian parental style accounted for 15 percent of the variance
on Learning at Home. Further analysis of the correlation between Authoritarian parental
style and Learning at Home was conducted between the individual items in the school-
related parenting practice of Learning at Home and Authoritarian parental style.

Table 4.37
Learning at Home and Authoritarian Parental Style
Correlations
ql 1
Pearson Correlation

qll
ql5 q39 q46 q47
q48 Authoritarian
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql5
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q39
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q46
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q47
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q48
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Authoritarian Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)
_____________N
34
.473
.005
34
34
.349* .307
.043
.077
34
34
1
34
.266 .137 .092

.134 .448 .611
33
33
33
1
33
.392* .257 .513** .556**

.022 .143
34
34
.002 .001
34
33
34
.342* .306 .233 .162 .306

.047 .079 .185
34
34
34
.366 .079
33
34
34
.312 .081.480** .026.484**
.115
.077
.653
.005
.888
.004
.525
33
33
33
32
33
33
33_
Table 4.37 presents the correlations between the individual items in the schoolrelated parenting practice Learning at Home and the parental style Authoritarian. Items
39 and 47 revealed correlations with Authoritarian parental style. Item 39, "I believe in
setting tasks to raise my child's level of competence" showed a strong correlation to

Authoritarian parental style (r = ASO, ? = .005). Item 39 accounted for 23 percent of the
variance on the dimension of Authoritarian parental style. Item 47, "I consistently
103
engage my child in intellectually meaningful discussions" also showed a strong

correlation to Authoritarian parental style (r = .484, ? = .004). Item 47 accounted for 23
percent of the variance on Authoritarian parental style.
Table 4.38 presents the negative correlation between the school-related parenting
practice of Learning at Home and parental style Permissive (r = -.560,/) = .001). The
dimension Permissive parental style accounted for 3 1 percent of the variance on
Learning at Home. The negative correlation between permissive parental style and
Learning at Home indicated that the more permissive parents are with their children, the
less Learning at Home is accomplished. Further analysis of the correlation between
Permissive parental style and Learning at Home was conducted between the individual
items in the dimension of Permissive parental style and the school-related parenting
practice of Learning at Home.
Table 4.38
Parental Style Permissive
Correlations
Learnhome
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Permissive
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Permissive
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
____________N
-.560**
.001
33
-.560
32
1
.001
32
3_3_
Table 4.39 presents the correlations between the individual items in Permissive
parental style and the school-related parenting practice of Learning at Home. Items 21,
104
41 and 43 revealed correlations with Learning at Home. Item 21, "I offer my child little
or no help with school homework, even if asked because the homework is not that
important and is really up to the child to complete," showed a negative correlation with
Learning at Home (r = -.350, ? = .046). Item 21 accounted for 12 percent of the
variance on Learning at Home. The more parents do not assist their children with school
homework and leave it entirely up to the students to complete, the less Learning at
Home is accomplished.
Table 4.39
Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the Parental Style Permissive and the
School-Related Parenting Practice of Learning at Home
Correlations
Permissive Parental Style Items
_______________________________Learnhome q21 q35 q40 q41 q42 q43

Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q21
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q35
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q40
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q41
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q42
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q43
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
____________N
33
-.350
.046
33
34
-.284
.109
.056
.754
33
34
34
-.126 -.043 .193

.483 .810 .273
33
34
34
1
34
-.391* .319 .551" .465**
.027 .071 .001 .006

32
33
33
33
33
-.339 -.096 .210 -.045 .163

.053 .589 .234 .799 .365
33
34
34
34
33
1
34
-.441* .268 -.025 .004 .099 .362*

.010 .125 .886 .981
33
34

34
34
.583 .035
33
34
34
105
Item 41 , "I prefer to let my child watch what he/she wants to on television on the
principle that my child should choose his/her own intellectual content" showed a
negative correlation to Learning at Home (r = -.391, ? = .027). Item 41 accounted for 15
percent of the variance on Learning at Home. The more parents allow their children to
watch whatever they want on television and for the child to regulate himself or herself
in the selection of the intellectual content of the television program, the less Learning at
Home is accomplished. Item 43, "I willingly clean up after my child and I do not insist
that he/she helps," showed a negative correlation with Learning at Home (r = -.441,/) =
.010). Item 43 accounted for 19 percent of the variance on Learning at Home. The more
parents willingly clean up after their children and do not insist on having the children
help in cleaning up after themselves, the less Learning at Home will be accomplished.
dimension of parental style Permissive and Learning at Home. Item 35, "My child is
allowed to visit freely with friends in the neighborhood," correlated positively with Item
41 , "I prefer to let my child watch what he/she wants to on television on the principle
that my child should choose his/her own intellectual content" (r = .465, ? .006). Item
35 accounted for 22 percent of the variance on Item 41 . Item 40, "I prefer to let my child
select his/her own reading material," also correlated positively with Item 41, "I prefer to
let my child watch what he/she wants to on television on the principle that my child
should choose his/her own intellectual content" (r = .465, ? = .006). Item 35 accounted
for 22 percent of the variance on Item 41. Item 42, "I do not believe my child should
have to put his/her toys away and clean up his/her own mess," correlated positively with
Item 43, "I willingly clean up after my child and I do not insist that he/she helps" (r =
.362, ? = .035). Item 42 accounted for 13 percent of the variance on Item 43.
practice of Learning at Home and parental style Authoritative (r = .534, ? = .002). The
dimensions of Authoritative parental style accounted for 29 percent of the variance on
Learning at Home. Further analysis of the correlation between Authoritative parental

style and Learning at Home was conducted between the individual items in the
dimension of Authoritative parental style and the school-related parenting practice of
Learning at Home.
Table 4.40
Parental Style Authoritative
Correlations
Learnhome
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Authoritative
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Sig. (2-tailed)
___________N
.534
.002
33
.534
32
1
.002
32
32_

Authoritative parental style and the school-related parenting practice of Learning at
Home. Items 22, 38 and 44 revealed positive correlations with Learning at Home. Item
22, "I often provoke or encourage oppositional behavior from my child by such methods
as playing games, teasing and challenging my child to express his/her questions about
my scope of authority" (r = .367, ? = .036) accounted for 13 percent of the variance on
Learning at Home. Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious part of my childrearing
107
policy because I value my child's work" showed a strong correlation to Learning at

Home (r = .618, ? < .001) and accounted for 38 percent of the variance on Learning at
Home. Item 44, "I listen and am responsive to my child's critical comments about me or
another adult (e.g., teacher)" correlated with Learning at Home (r = .464, ? = .006). Item
44 accounted for 22 percent of the variance on Learning at Home.
Table 4.41
Correlation Matrix for Individual Questions in the Parental Style Authoritative and the
School-Related Parenting Practice of Learning at Home
Correlations
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
Authoritative Parental Style Items

Learnhome q22 q26 q37 q38 q44 q45
1
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q22
Pearson Correlation
.367*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.036
q26
Sig. (2-tailed)
.073 .030
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q44
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q45
34
.321 .378*
q38
33
Pearson Correlation
N
q37
33
32
33
1
33
.192 .319 .145

.283 .066 .422
33
34
33
1
34
.618** .414* .275 .435*
.000 .015 .121 .010

33
34
33
34
34
.464** .361* -.044 .130 .304

.006 .036 .810 .465
33
34
33
34
.080
34
34
Pearson Correlation
.313.399* .129 .040 .215.519**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.076 .022 .483 .824 .229 .002
____________N
33
33

32
33
33
33
1
33
in the dimension of parental style Authoritative. Item 22 correlated with Item 26, "My
child's day-to-day activities are structured by my daily regimen and adhered to with
only rare exceptions" (r = .378,/? = .030). Item 22 accounted for 14 percent of the
variance on Item 26. Item 22 correlated with Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious
part of my childrearing policy because I value my child's level of competence" (r =
.414,/? = .015). Item 22 accounted for 17 percent of the variance on Item 38. Item 37,
"My child has one or more tasks to perform which he/she does regularly without
choice," correlated with Item 38, "I set regular tasks as a conscious part of my
childrearing policy because I value my child's level of competence" (r = .435, ? = .010).

Item 37 accounted for 19 percent of the variance on Item 38. Item 22 correlated with
Item 44, "I listen and am responsive to my child's critical comments about me or
another adult (e.g., teacher)" (r = .361, ? = .036).
Table 4.42
Correlation Chart for the School-Related Parenting Practice Learning at Home and the
Students' Disposition of Academic Self-Concept
Correlations
Learnhome
Learnhome
Pearson Correlation
AcademicSelC
.040
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
AcademicSelC
.359*
33
33
Pearson Correlation
359*
Sig. (2-tailed)
.040
33
Item 22 accounted for 13 percent of the variance on Item 44. Item 22 also
34_
109
correlated with item 45, "I encourage critical comments from my child" (r = .399, ? =
.022). Item 22 accounted for 16 percent of Item 45. Item 44 correlated with Item 45 (r =
.519, ? = .002). Item 44 accounted for 27 percent of the variance on Item 45.
Table 4.43

Learning at Home and the Students' Disposition of Academic Self-Concept
Correlations

qll ql5 q39 q46 q47
AcademicSelC
AcademicSelC Pearson
Correlation
q48
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql 1
Pearson
34
.241
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql5
Pearson
.170
34
34
.423* .473**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q39
Pearson
.013
.005
34
34
34
.318 .349*
.307
.067
.043
.077
34
34
34
34
.212
.266
.137
.092
.236
.134
.448
.611
33
33
33
33
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q46
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q47
Pearson
33
.169 .392* .257 .513** .556**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q48
Pearson
.339
.022
.143
.002
.001
34
34
34
34
33
34
.034 .342* .306
.233
.162
.306
.850
.047
.079
.185
.366
.079
34
34
34
34
33
34
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N

34
110
practice of Learning at Home and the student disposition Academic Self-Concept (r =

.359,p = .040). The dimensions of Learning at Home accounted for 13 percent of the
variance on Academic Self-Concept. Further analysis of the correlation between
Learning at Home and Academic Self-Concept was conducted between the individual
items in the dimension of Learning at Home and the students' disposition of Academic
Self-Concept.
Table 4.43 presents the positive correlations between the individual items in
Learning at Home and the students' disposition of Academic Self-Concept. Item 15, "I
take my child to the library" was the only item in the dimension of Learning at Home
that revealed any correlations with Academic Self-Concept (r = .423, ? = .013). Item 15
accounted for 18 percent of the variance on Learning at Home.
Table 4.43 shows additional positive correlations between individual items in the
dimension of students' disposition Academic Self-Concept. Item 1 1, "I play formal
education games at home with my child" correlated with Item 15, "I take my child to the
library" (r = .473, ? = .005). Item 1 1 accounted for 22 percent of the variance on Item
15. Item 1 1 also correlated with Item 39, "I believe in setting in tasks to raise my child's
level of competence" (r = .349, ? = .043). Item 1 1 accounted for 12 percent of the

variance on Item 39. Item 1 1 also correlated with Item 47,"I consistently engage my
child in intellectually meaningful discussions" (r = .392, ? = .022). Item 1 1 accounted for
15 percent of the variance on Item 47. Item 1 1 also correlated with Item 48, "I help my
child with homework" (r = .342, ? = .047). Item 1 1 accounted for 12 percent of the
variance on Item 48. Item 39, "I believe in setting in tasks to raise my child's level of
competence" correlated with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually
Ill
meaningful discussions" ( r = .513, ? = .002) Item 39 accounted for 26 percent of the

variance on Item 47. Item 46, "I am seeking to develop my child's verbal and reasoning
abilities" had a strong correlation with Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in
intellectually meaningful discussions" (r = .556, ? = .001). Item 46 accounted for 31
percent of the variance on Item 47.
Related Behaviors
Numerous relationships and behaviors related to research question five were

uncovered through the correlation analysis.
Parenting
Appropriate parenting behaviors were associated with parents' volunteering in
after school programs and helping with homework, "taking my child to the library,"
"setting tasks to raise my child's competence," "challenging my child and provoking
oppositional behaviors by playing games," "setting regular tasks for my child and
encouraging critical comments from my child." Permissive parent behaviors that include
"not helping my child with homework," "allowing my child to select his or her own
reading materials," and "encouraging critical comments from my child" were associated
with weak parenting behaviors.
Volunteering
Volunteering was associated with School Participation activities such as
attending night performances at school, participating in parent/teacher conferences and

sharing school activities with one's child. In addition, Learning at Home activities of
setting tasks for children to raise their competence and consistently engaging children in
meaningful discussions were associated with Volunteering.
112
Parental school participation included Learning at Home activities of playing
formal education games with one's child and engaging one's child in meaningful
discussions.
Learning at Home
Learning at Home was an important dimension associated with student academic
success. Several parental style variables were associated with Learning at Home. In the
Authoritarian style, taking a child to the library, setting tasks for a child, engaging a
child in meaningful discussions; in Authoritative style, provoking, encouraging
oppositional behaviors in games, "setting regular tasks to value my child's work," and
"listening and being responsive to my child's critical comments" were behaviors
associated with Learning at Home. Permissive variables of "offering little help to my
child," "allowing my child to watch on television what he or she wants," and "cleaning
up after my child" were associated with weak patterns of Learning at Home.
A positive Academic Self-Concept was associated with Authoritarian parental
style of taking one's child to the library and "setting tasks to raise my child's level of
competence."
Since the related literature review revealed that Authoritative parental style was
predict Authoritative parenting Style? Research question six was answered using
correlation and partial correlation.
113
Table 4.44
Descriptive Statistics for School-Related Parenting Practices: Parenting,

Volunteering, School Participation, Learning at Home, and Authoritative Parental Style
Authoritative
Parenting
Volunteering
SchoolPart
Learnhome
Mean
Item Mean
Std. Deviation
18.17
13.07
12.07
21.31
21.55
3.0
3.2
3.0
4.2
3.5
3.51
3.14
3.49
2.28
3.33
29
29
29
29
29
Table 4.44 presents the descriptive statistics of the four school-related parenting
practices and the Authoritative parental style. The means for Volunteering 12.07 (SD =
3.49) and Parenting 13.07 (SD = 3.2) indicate that parents "sometimes" identify their
school-related parenting practice as Volunteering or Parenting. The means for School
Participation, 21.31(SD = 2.28; and Learning at Home, 21.55 (SD = 3.33) indicate that
parents "often" described their school-related parenting practice as School Participation

or Learning at Home.
Table 4.45
Correlations Matrix of School-Related Parenting Practices and of Parenting,

Volunteering, School Participation and Learning at Home and the Authoritative Parental
Style
Correlations3
Authoritative Parenting Volunteer SchoolPart Learnhome

Sig. (1 -tailed)
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (1 -tailed)
.469
Pearson Correlation
.226
.602
Sig. (1 -tailed)
.1.19
.000
Pearson Correlation
.128
.168
.540
Sig. (1 -tailed)
.254
.192
.001
Pearson Correlation
.532
.645
.322
.357
Sig. (1 -tailed)
.001
.000
.044
.029
Parenting
Volunteer
SchoolPart
Learnhome
a. Listwise N=29
.005
114
With a mean of 18.17 (SD = 3.51), parents reported that their parental style was
"sometimes" Authoritative. Further investigation was done using a correlation analysis
(see Table 4.42) with all five dimensions.
Table 4.45 presents the correlation matrix of the four school-related parenting
practices and the Authoritative Parental style. Because Learning at Home correlated
with all the variables, the correlations were run again controlling the variable Learning
at Home.
Table 4.46
Partial Correlation Matrix for Authoritative Parental Style and School-Related Parenting
Practices with Learning at Home Controlled
Correlations
AuthoritaControl Variables
Learnhome
Volunteer
Volunteer SchoolPart Parenting

Correlation
tive
Significance (2tailed)
Df
SchoolPart
Correlation
.481
.010
Df
Parenting
Correlation
Df
Authoritative Correlation
Df
26
.545
-.087
.003
.658
26
26
.069
-.402
.195
.728
.034
.320
26
26
26
Table 4.46 shows the new correlations when Learning at Home was controlled.
Only one item showed any correlation to Authoritative parental style. School
115
Participation correlated negatively with the Authoritative parental style (r = -.402, ? =

.034). Authoritative parental style accounted for 16 percent of the variance on School
Participation. The more authoritative the parental style the less parents participate in
school activities.
Table 4.47
Correlation Matrix for Individual Items in the School-Related Parenting Practice of

School Participation and the Authoritative Parental Style
Correlations
Authoritative
Participation
Pearson
Items in School Participation

q7
q8
qlO
ql7
ql8
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
qV
Pearson
32
1
.128
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
q8
.484
32
34
.016
.418*
.933
.014
32
34
34
.436*
.046
.221
.013
.796
.208
32
34
34
34
Pearson
Correlation
.127 .575"
.489"
.275
Sig. (2-tailed)
.497
.000
.004
.121
31
33
33
33
33
.207
.291
.135
-.027
.333
.256
.095
.448
.880
.058
32
34
34
34
33
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
qlO
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
ql7
ql8
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N

Table 4.47 presents the correlations between the individual items in School
34
116
Participation and the Authoritative parental style. Item 10, "I participate in school
fundraisers" was the only item in the dimension of School Participation that revealed
any correlation with Authoritative parental style (r = - .436, ? = .013). Item 10
accounted for 19 percent of the variance on the Authoritative parental style and
indicated that the more authoritative parents are the less they participated in fund raisers.
school-related parenting practice of School Participation. Item 7, "I attend night

performances, programs or assemblies," correlated positively with Item 8, "I participate
in parent/teacher conferences" (r = .418,/? = .014). Item 7 accounted for 17 percent of
the variance on Item 8. Item 7 showed a strong positive correlation with Item 17, "My
child and I participate in school-related activities" (r = .575, ? < .001). Item 7 accounted
for 33 percent of the variance on Item 17. Item 8, "I participate in parent/teacher
conference," also correlated positively to Item 1 7, "My child and I participate in schoolrelated activities" (r = .489, ? = .004). Item 8 accounted for 24 percent of the variance
on Item 17.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships among parental
styles, school-related parenting practices and students' dispositions, and their effect on
students' academic proficiency levels based on the results of the 2007-2008 New York
State eighth-grade mathematics assessment. Students selected for this study achieved
Levels 3 and 4 on their standardized mathematics test. The study sought to ascertain if
there were differences in parental styles, school-related parenting practices and students'
dispositions, that resulted in students achieving a Level 3 or Level 4, proficiency or

mastery respectively.
117
Parental Styles
Parental styles, for the purpose of this study were Authoritarian, Permissive and
Authoritative (Baumrind, 1966). A fourth parental style: Non-Coercive (Gerald, 2007)
was considered for this study. After factor analysis, Non-Coercive parental style
was dropped. School-related parenting practicesParenting, Volunteering, School

Participation and Learning at Home (Epstein, 1995)were selected for this study.
Student dispositions were defined as Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger
Control.
Through the use of item analysis and descriptive statistics, it was found that the
majority of the parents in this study indicated that their parental style could best be
described as Authoritarian. The Authoritarian parent demands total obedience and has
no compunction about using punitive methods to enforce this demand. There is no
negotiation between the authoritarian parent and the child. The parents in the survey
indicated that they either "often" or "always" agreed with the statements in all five
survey items on the dimension of Authoritarian parental style. All five items had mean
score above 3.0 within the "sometimes," "often" and "always" ranges.
Parents indicated that they "somewhat" agreed that their parental style could be
described as Authoritative. The Authoritative parent recognizes and encourages the
child's right to individuality and the Authoritative parent is one who negotiates with the
child in establishing expectations. This dimension of Authoritative parental style
comprised six questions with a range of 6-30. Four items had item mean score above 3.0
within the "sometimes," "often" and "always" ranges. The mean score of parents who
indicated that they "somewhat" agreed that their parental style could best be described
as Authoritative was 18.0.
118
The majority of parents in this study disagreed that their parental style could best
be described as permissive. The child's actions and impulses are indulged by the
permissive parent. The parent seeks input from the child in all decisions and is "nonpunitive and acceptant" (Baumrind, 1966, p. 256). With a range score of 6-30, the mean
score for parents' responses to items on the dimension of permissive parental style was
13.4.
School-Related Parenting Practice

Parents in this study responded to questions measuring four dimensions of
school-related parenting practices: Parenting, Volunteering, School Participation and
Learning at Home (Epstein, 1995).
Parenting was defined as the application of proper child-rearing skills that
promote attention to the health and safety needs. This includes the provision of adequate
supervision, attention to discipline, the provision of a home environment conducive to
the school-aged child's academic achievement, establishment of rules to guide the child
in making responsible decision and the provision of punishment to promote age
appropriate behaviors (Epstein, 1995).
Learning at Home was defined as parent involvement in learning activities at
home such as rendering assistance, either parent-initiated or child-initiated request for
assistance, in homework or class work (Epstein, 1995).
Volunteering in Schools was defined as parent involvement in assisting teachers,
administrators, and children. Volunteering also encompasses the parent's attendance at
school sponsored activities such as assemblies, field trips, and fund raisers as a show of
support for the child. Volunteering in school is primarily done as a means of rendering
supervisory assistance (Epstein, 1995).
119
Gerald (2007) defined school participation as parents' attendance and active

involvement in workshops, conferences, assemblies conducted by the school. School
participation also includes after-school activities conducted by the school such as field
trips, and fund raising activities such as school governance and advocacy, involvement
in decision-making roles in the decision making PTA/PTO. Advisory Councils and
other committees or groups at the school, districts, or state level and parents' and
community activities in independent advocacy groups that monitor schools and work for
school improvement were also considered school participation. School participation
encompasses both volunteering for supervisory assistance and being involved in the
planning and implementation levels of the school's decision making.
After descriptive statistics and independent samples Mests were conducted, it
was found that that the mean scores for School Participation and Learning at home were
higher than Volunteering and Parenting: more parents indicated their dominant schoolrelated parenting practice as School Participation and Learning at Home. Descriptive
statistics revealed no significant difference between students who received Level 3 in
mathematics and students who received Level 4 for Learning at Home, School
Participation, and Volunteering. Learning at Home, School Participation, and

Volunteering at school were not associated with students receiving either a Level 3 or
Level 4. Parenting accounted for 25 percent of the variance for students who received
Level 3 on their eighth grade 2008 mathematics examination in this suburban Long
Island school. Parents who described their parenting practice as Parenting were
associated with their children who received Level 3 on the mathematics examination.
120
A study of student dispositions by gender was performed using a test of
individual means or a Mest. The dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept,
and Anger Control were selected as the students' dispositions based on prior researches
by Marsh and O'Neil (1984) who studied Self-Concept and Academic Self-Concept and
Rusielewicz (2005) who studied Anger Control. Fifty percent of the students who
participated in this study received Level 3 and the other fifty percent received Level 4
on the 2008 New York State mathematics eight grade assessment. Of the 34 students, 1 1
were girls and 23 were boys. The study did not reveal any significant difference
between girls and boys in their dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept
and Anger Control (see Table 4.12).
When male and female students' dispositions of Self-Control, Academic SelfConcept and Anger Control were studied regarding their relevance to students'
achievement level on the grade 8 mathematics assessment, the results indicated that
there was no significant effect on the achievement level of students who received Level
3 and Level 4 on their eighth grade mathematics examination in March 2008.
121
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction
This study examined the relationships of parental styles, school-related parenting

practices and student dispositions of self-concept, academic-self-concept and anger
control in student levels of proficiency in eighth-grade mathematics achievement
examinations. A summary of the findings of the study, conclusions drawn from the
study based on the statistical analysis of the data presented in the study, a review of
literature on parental styles, school-related parenting practices, student dispositions, and
recommendations based on the findings of the study is presented in this chapter.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of parental styles, schoolrelated parenting practices and student dispositions on students' achievement levels.
Achievement level was based on the proficiency level of students who demonstrated
proficiency on the eighth-grade mathematics examinations. The study sought to
understand what effect each of the variables had in determining the proficiency level:
Level 3 and level 4. Student dispositions, for the purpose of this study, were selfconcept, academic-self-concept and anger control. The study was conducted in a
suburban, Long Island, New York middle school comprised of four grade levels and a
total of 450 students. The racial composition of this school was 70 percent White, 12
percent Native American, 14 percent Black, 3 percent Hispanic and 1 percent Asian and
Pacific Islander. Twenty-three percent of students in this district are free or reduced
price lunch program recipients. Seventy students who demonstrated proficiency and
mastery with Levels 3 and 4 and their parents were eligible for participation in this
study. After three mailings and telephone calls to eligible students and their parents, 34
students and their parents participated in the study. The participants included 70 percent
White. Information on student demographic data was obtained from the student
management system being used in the school at the time the study was conducted.
Students were divided into two ethnic groups: White and Non-White. Students who
were categorized as Non-White were mainly Black, Native American, Asian, Pacific
Islander and Hispanic based on their parents' response to the question on ethnicity.
Eleven students or 32 percent were males and 23 students or 68 percent of the students
in this study were females (See Figure 4.1). Of the 34 students who participated in the
study, students who received Levels 3 and 4 were equally divided with 50 percent each
(See Figure 4.2).
A parent survey (Appendix F) adapted from Gerald's (2007) survey instrument,
based on the works of Baumrind's (1966) parental styles of Authoritative, Authoritarian
and Permissive parenting; and Epstein's (1991) school-related parenting practices of
Parenting, Volunteering, School Participation and Learning at Home was used to study
parental styles and school-related parenting practices. A second survey was
administered to the students whose parents responded to the parent survey. The
students' survey instrument (Appendix G) was based on Marsh and O'Neil's (1984) and
Rusielewicz's (2005) survey instruments studying the relationship of student Self-
concept and Academic Self-Concept; and Anger Control respectively, on student
123
achievement levels. For the purpose of this study, Self-Concept, Academic SelfConcept and Anger Control were categorized as student dispositions.
The data gathered from parents regarding their parental styles and school-related
parenting practices and the data gathered from the students regarding their dispositions
were compared to student proficiency levels on the eighth-grade mathematics
assessment examination. Students were separated into two groups based on their
proficiency level: Level 3 and Level 4. Students who received Level 3 in mathematics
met the New York State standard and with continued steady growth should pass the
Regents examinations. Level 4 students exceeded the standards and were moving
toward high performance on the Regents examinations (New York State Department of
Education, 2004, p.5).
The parents' survey consisted of 48 items in three categories. The first two items
focused on parents' demography. Items 3 to 25 asked parents to respond using a scale of
frequency of their actions: "Never," "Hardly Ever," "Sometimes," "Often" and
"Always." Items 26 to 48 asked parents to respond based on a scale of activity:
"Strongly Disagree," "Disagree," "Somewhat Agree," "Agree" and "Strongly Agree."
Items in the parent survey covered four parental styles: Authoritative, Authoritarian,
Permissive (Baumrind, 1966) and Non-Coercive (Gerald, 2007). Based on the responses
from the parents, a Cronbach's alpha coefficient for reliability was performed. Ten
items including all items for Non-Coercive parental style were deleted (See Figure 3.2).
Non-Coercive parental style was eliminated as a viable parental style in this study as it
returned a negative alpha coefficient. Items in the parents' survey were randomly
sequenced in an attempt to avoid prejudicing parents' responses.
The students' survey consisted of 24 items measuring three dimensions
of Student disposition: Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control. All

items required students to respond using a 5-point Likert scale based on a scale of how
frequently the items were performed: "Never," "Hardly Ever," "Sometimes," "Often" and
"Always." The items in the students' survey were based on Marsh and O'Neil's (1984)
study of student Self-Concept and Academic self-Concept and their relationships to
student achievement, and Rusielewicz's (2005) study of student disposition of Anger
Control and its relationship to academic achievement. After factor analysis was
performed on the 24 items in the student survey covering each of the three dimensions
of student disposition (See Tables 3.4 to 3.6), nine items were deleted from the survey
due to low factor loading (See Table 3.7). The remaining items were used to analyze the
results of the students' survey and to answer the six research questions in this study.
Research question one asked how parents of eighth-grade students described
their parental styles in three categories: Permissive, Authoritative, and Authoritarian.
Using descriptive statistics to answer this question, with a mean score of 19.5 in a range
of 5 to 25, parents "agreed" that their parental style was Authoritarian. The
Authoritarian parent demands total obedience and has no compunction about using
punitive methods to enforce this demand. Clear structures and expectations that the
child must meet are established. There is no negotiation between the Authoritarian
parent and the child.
With a mean score of 1 8 in a range 6 to 30, parents indicated that they
"somewhat agreed" that their parental style was Authoritative. The Authoritative parent
recognizes and encourages the child's right to individuality. The Authoritative parent is
one who negotiates with the child in establishing expectations. These expectations are
not mutable but once established, through give and take, are enforced.
With a mean score of 13.4 in a range of 6 to 30, parents "disagreed" that their
parental style was Permissive. The Permissive parental style has been described by
Baumrind (1966) as one in which the child's actions and impulses are indulged by the
parent. The parent seeks input from the child in all decisions and is "non-punitive and
acceptant" (Baumrind, 1966, p. 256). The Permissive parent does not establish
boundaries. Baumrind (1989) defined the permissive parent as one who does not believe
in being punitive toward the child. In fact, this type of parent is accepting and
supporting of the child's actions and impulses.
Research question two asked how parents of eighth-grade students described
their school-related parenting practices in four categories: Parenting, Volunteering,
Learning at Home and School Participation. After descriptive statistics and independent
samples -tests were conducted, parents indicated that they "somewhat agreed" that their
school-related parenting practice could be described as Volunteering and Parenting.
School Participation with a mean score of 21.18 in a range of 5 to 25 indicated that
parents "agreed" that they participated in school events. Parents tended to agree that
they engaged in Learning at Home activities. Descriptive statistics revealed no
significant difference between students who received Level 3 in mathematics and
students who received Level 4 for the school-related parenting practices of Learning at
Home, School Participation and Volunteering. Learning at Home, School Participation
and Volunteering at school were not associated with students receiving either a Level 3
or Level 4.
There was a significant difference between the parents of students who received
Level 3 and Level 4 in mathematics for the school-related parenting practices of
Parenting. More Level 3 students came from homes in which parents described their
school-related parenting practice as Parenting than did parents of students who received
Level 4. Parenting is being responsible for the health and safety, supervision, discipline,
guidance, rule setting, punishment, setting of curfew, and the provision of a home
environment that is conducive to the child's educational achievement and appropriate

behavior at each grade level (Epstein, 1995).
Research question three sought to examine whether there were differences in the
dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept, and Anger Control for male and
female eighth-grade students. Even though the students involved in this survey were
high achieving students who demonstrated proficiency (Level 3) and mastery (Level 4),
Anger Control was included as a variable because students who have poor anger control
are more inclined to be suspended from school resulting in absence from classes.
Frequent absences from school impact student academic achievement levels
(Rusielewicz, 2005). A test of individual means was used to analyze the students'
responses on the student survey. The test revealed that there were no statistically
significant differences in scores between males and females in the dispositions of SelfConcept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control (See Table 4.12). A slight
difference in scores was reported for males and females on the disposition of Anger
control. This slight difference could be attributed to the fact that girls in this study out
numbered boys by approximately a 2:1 ratio (See Table 4.1).
Research question four sought answers to whether there were any differences
between students who received Level 3 and students who received Level 4 on eighthgrade mathematics assessment in parental styles, school-related parenting practices, and
student dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic-Self-Concept, and Anger Control. A
test of individual means was employed to answer this question.
127
Table 4.13 shows the independent sample Mest results for research question
four. The results of the independent sample Mest showed that there were no statistically
significant difference in scores for the dimensions of Volunteering, School Participation,
Authoritarian, Permissive, Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control for
eighth-grade students who received Levels 3 and 4 on their standardized mathematics
test. There was a slight; albeit, not statistically significant difference in scores for the
dimensions of Learning at Home (p = .069) and Authoritative parental style (p = .063).

The independent sample Mest showed a statistically significant (p = .004) difference in
scores for the dimension of Parenting in students receiving Level 3 and students
receiving Level 4 on their 2007-2008 eighth-grade standardized mathematics test.
Parents of students on Level 3 mathematics achievement reported more frequent schoolrelated parenting practices than parents with students in Level 4.
Research question five sought answers to whether there were any relationships
among parenting practices of Parenting, School Participation, Learning at Home and
Volunteering; Student dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger
Control; and parental styles of Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student
proficiency level on the eighth-grade mathematics examinations in March 2008.
Research question five was answered through the use of correlation analysis. A series of
correlation analyses were performed to answer this research question.
Table 4.17 shows that there were 12 positive correlations among the schoolrelated parenting practices of Parenting, School Participation, Learning at Home and
Volunteering; Student dispositions of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and Anger
Control; and parental styles of Authoritarian, Authoritative and Permissive and student
proficiency levels on the eighth-grade mathematics examinations in 2008. The
following are all the correlations that emanated from research question five in this
study: Parenting and mathematics passing level, Parenting and Volunteering, Parenting
and Learning at Home, Volunteering and School Participation, Volunteering and
Learning at Home, School Participation and Learning at Home, Learning at Home and
Authoritarian parental style, Learning at Home and Permissive parental style, Learning
at Home and Authoritative parental style, Learning at Home and Academic SelfConcept, Parenting and Permissive parental style, and Parenting and Authoritative
parental style. Permissive parental style had a negative relationship with Parenting and
Authoritative parental styles. Learning at Home had a negative relationship with
Permissive parental style. Each correlation was addressed separately through the use of
correlation analysis of the paired dimensions, and correlation of individual items in one
dimension compared with the dimension of the other variable to examine the percent of
variance that each individual item had on the total dimension.
Results of correlations for research question five showed Parenting accounted
for 25 percent of the variance on Mathematics Level 3, Parenting accounted for 27

percent of the variance on Volunteering, Learning at Home accounted for 45 percent of
the variance on Parenting, Permissive parental style accounted for 19 percent of the
variance on Parenting, Authoritative accounted for 20 percent of the variance on
Parenting, Volunteering accounted for 31 percent of the variance on School
Participation, Volunteering accounted for 16 percent of the variance on Learning at

Home, Learning at Home accounted for 16 percent of the variance on School
Participation, Authoritarian accounted for 15 percent of the variance on Learning at

Home, Permissive accounted for 3 1 percent of the variance on Learning at Home,
Authoritative accounted for 29 percent of the variance on Learning at Home, and
129
Learning at Home accounted for 13 percent of the variance on Academic Self-Concept.

Tables 4.18 to 4.40 presented the correlations including the individual items that were
correlated within each category. Some items within the same dimension showed
correlations with each other and were also analyzed. For this study, correlations with a
variance of less than 10 percent were considered weak and were not discussed.
Research question six was derived from the related literature review. The
literature review revealed that Authoritative parental style was associated with higher
achievement of students at school. Research question six sought answers to what
parenting practices predict Authoritative parental style. This question was intended to be
answered using a regression model, however one of the school-related parenting
practices Learning at home revealed correlation with all the other variables
causing colinearity. Correlation and partial correlation were used to answer this
question.
After correlation analysis was performed, Learning at Home revealed a correlation
with all the other variables. Correlation was then run with Learning at Home being a
controlled variable. School Participation resulted in the only variable that had a
correlation with Authoritative parental style. However, there was a trivial negative
relationship between the Authoritative parental style and School Participation. Learning
at Home was the best predictor of Authoritative parental style. Querido et al. (2002)
concluded that
The authoritative parenting style was most predictive of fewer behavior

problems in our sample of African-American preschool children,
supporting our hypothesis. This finding is similar to European-American
families, which have shown that the authoritative parenting style has a
positive impact on child development (Baumrind, 1983) and is consistent
with studies of Chinese children showing an association between
130
authoritative parenting and children's school and social adjustment

(Chen, Dong, & Zhou, 1977). (p. 275)
Steinberg and Elmen (1986) also reported that parents who used authoritative
parental style of parenting had children who performed better academically than
students in households in which the parents had some other form of parental styles. The
findings of this study had some serious implications for parents who identified their
parenting practice as School Participation. Student achievement levels on the 2008
eighth-grade New York State mathematics examinations would have been higher if
School Participation was lower.
Conclusions
This study was based on Gerald's (2007) study of the relationship between
school-related parenting practices and parental styles, and student academic
achievement based on grade 4 student results on the 2004 and 2005 ELA examinations.
For his study Gerald (2007) focused attention on the work of Epstein et al (2002)
parental involvement activities: Parenting, Volunteering, School Participation, Learning
at Home and Collaborating with the Community. This study looked at the four schoolrelated parenting practices that yielded the highest variance in Gerald's (2007) study:
Parenting, Learning at Home, Volunteering and School Participation. Gerald (2007) also
focused his study on Baumrind's (1996) parental styles: Permissive, Authoritative and
Authoritarian parental styles. A fourth parental style - Non Coercivewas introduced
by Gerald (2007) and used in his study. Gerald's (2007) survey measuring schoolrelated parenting practices and parental styles was adapted from the works of Baumrind
(1996) and Epstein et al (2002). After factor analysis, Non-Coercive parental style was
discarded as a viable parental style for this study.
131
Gerald (2007) concluded that there was a positive correlation between the
Authoritative parental style and student achievement on the fourth-grade English
Language Arts examinations in New York State in the years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005.
The other parental styles did not result in any significant student achievement. Gerald's
(2007) findings supported research conducted by Dornbusch et al (1987) that the
authoritative parental style accounts for greater student achievement levels while
permissive and authoritarian parental styles resulted in lower student grades. Darling
and Steinberg (1993) concluded that the most consistent predictor of student academic
achievement throughout the child's school years was authoritative parenting style.
Parents who participated in this study were keen to describe their parental style as
Authoritarian. With a mean score of 19.6 and a range of 5 to 25, parents indicated that
their parental style was Authoritarian. With a mean score of 18, parents in this study
indicated that they "somewhat agreed" that their parental style was Authoritative. This
dimension of Authoritative parental style comprised of six questions with a range of 6 to
30.
Even though more parents in this study identified their parental style as
Authoritarian, this study revealed that the Authoritarian parental style was not
statistically significant in students receiving mastery Level 4 on their grade 8
mathematics test while the Authoritative parental style resulted in a slight, albeit not
statistically significant, relationship to student receiving Level 4 on their grade 8
mathematics test. The findings of Gerald's (2007) study of the relationship between the
Authoritative parental style and student achievement on the grade 4 ELA achievement
test were slightly supported by this study. However, Gerald's (2007) study looked at
low achieving students (Levels 1 and 2) and proficiency (Levels 3 and 4) while this
132
study looked at only the students who passed in two categories (Level 3 and Level 4) in
mathematics at the grade 8 level. Information on the relationship between Authoritative
parental style and student passing level was disaggregated in this study while Gerald
(2007) clustered his relationship to both passing levels. Although there was no statistical
significance between student achievement levels and the Authoritarian parental style,
the Authoritarian parental style was relevant to student achievement levels in this study
as more than 50 percent of the parents of the combined achievement level groupings
Level 3 and Level 4 indicated that their parental style can be best described as
Authoritarian. The results on the relationship between student passing levels in this
study were not supported by Gerald's (2007) study in which the majority of parents
described their parental style as Authoritarian; however, the Authoritative parental style
was responsible for a higher variance in student achievement levels on the grade 4 ELA
examinations in the years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. The Permissive parental style was
not related in this study to student achievement at Level 3 or Level 4. Gerald (2007) also
concluded that the Permissive parental style was not related to student achievement at
the proficient (Levels 3 and 4) on the grade 4 ELA 2003-2004 and 2004-2005
examinations.
School Participation and Student Proficiency Levels

On the dimension of school-related parenting practices, through the use of
descriptive statistics it was found that most parents in this study indicated that their
school-related parenting practice could best be described as School Participation (See
Table 4.7). Gerald (2007) defined school participation as parents' attendance and active
involvement in workshops, conferences, and assemblies conducted by the school.
School participation also included after-school activities conducted by the school such
133
as field trips, and fundraising activities such as school governance and advocacy,
involvement in decision-making roles in the PTA/PTO, Advisory Councils; other
committees or groups at the school, districts, or state level, and parents' and community
activities in independent advocacy groups that monitor schools and work for school
improvement as school participation. School participation encompasses both
volunteering for supervisory assistance and being involved in the planning and
implementation levels of the school's decision making.
The dimension of School Participation consisted of 5-items on a five point Likert
scale. Parents' responded in one of five categories: "Never," "Hardly Ever,"
"Sometimes," "Often," and "Always." The two lowest response rates in the "often" or
"always" categories on the dimension of School Participation were for item 10, "I
participate in school fundraisers" with 58 percent; and item 17, "My child and I
participate in school-related activities" with 60.6 percent. The other three items had
much more favorable response rates in the "often" or "always" categories: Item 8, "I
participate in parent/teacher conferences" 85.2 percent; Item 7, 1 attend night
performances, programs, or assemblies" 94.1 percent; and Item 18, "My child and I talk
about school" 100 percent.
The findings here are important because the two lowest response rates came
from activities that required parents to volunteer their time to work in the school. The
next lowest response rate in the "often" or "always" category was item 8 which asked
parents if they participated in parent/teacher conference. The three lowest response rate
items in the "often" or "always" categories were items that required interaction between
the parents and school officials. Chavkin and Williams (1985) found that parents were
less inclined to participate in school-related activities within the school. Parent
134
involvement in school participation extended only to the traditional roles within which
parents feel comfortable, such as, attendance at assembly programs, attending meet and
greet night, and helping their children with homework. Mannan and Blackwell (2001)
noted that school personnel held expectations that parents would be involved in their
children's education but the school leaders did not create an atmosphere conducive to
parents' involvement. The schools failed to educate the parents in ways that would make
their involvement meaningful and pleasant.
This study illustrated the continued rift between the home and parent
involvement in school activities. Gerald (2007) concluded that the Authoritative
parental style was related to student achievement at the proficiency level. However, this
study concluded that School Participation was the only variable that had a positive
correlation with Authoritative parental style. However, there was a trivial negative
relationship between the Authoritative parental style and School Participation. Parents
who agreed that their parental style was Authoritative were not actively involved in
activities within the school on a regular basis. If the Authoritative parental style is the
preferred parental style in engendering eighth-grade student achievement in

mathematics, the challenge for educators is how to get parents involved in schoolrelated activities within the school while encouraging the Authoritative parental style.
Okpala, Okpala and Smith (2001) concluded that parental hours spent working in
schools were not related to student academic achievement. After independent Mest was
completed on School Participation and student academic achievement level, this study,
like Gerald (2007), concluded that there was no merit to parent involvement in school as
a determinant of student academic proficiency levels on the eighth-grade mathematics

examination in March 2008 in one sub-urban Long Island middle school (See Table
4.13). Continued emphasis on parents joining the PTA/PTO or to work on school

committees, though helpful in the effective functioning of schools, was not related to
student academic achievement levels.
Learning at Home and Student Proficiency Level
Learning at Home was the second school-related parenting practice selected by

the parents in this study. Learning at Home was defined by Epstein (1995) as parent
involvement in learning activities at home such as rendering assistance, either parentinitiated or child-initiated request for assistance, in homework or class work. The
dimension of Learning at Home consisted of six items on a 5-point Likert scale. Parents
responded in one of five categories: "Never," "Hardly Ever," "Sometimes," "Often" and
"Always." Item 47, "I consistently engage my child in intellectually meaningful
discussions" had the highest percentage of responses in the "often" or "always"
categories at 79.5 percent. Item 46, "I am seeking to develop my child's verbal and
reasoning abilities" had the second highest percentage of responses in the "often" or
"always" categories at 78.8 percent. Item 39, "I believe in setting tasks to raise my
child's level of competence" had the third highest percentage of response in the "often"
or "always" categories at 61.7 percent. Item 15, "I take my child to the library" had the
fourth highest percentage of response in the "often" or "always" categories at 50
percent. Item 48, "I help my child with homework" had the second lowest percentage of
response in the "often" or "always" categories at 47.1 percent. Item 1 1, "I play formal
education games at home with my child" had the lowest percentage of response in the
"often" or "always" categories at 14.7 percent. The findings here are important because
it is noteworthy that the three lowest response rates came from activities that required
parents to work with their children directly on academic activities. Gerald (2007)
136
concluded that students who were proficient on the fourth-grade ELA tests in 2003-2004
and 2004-2005 had parents who scored higher on the dimension of Learning at Home
than did the students who failed the ELA tests. In this study, Learning at home had a
slight, but not statistically, significant relationship with students achieving proficiency at
the Level 4 over students who received Level 3.
Parenting and Student Proficiency Level

Parents' third choice of school-related parenting practice was Parenting. Parents
were only somewhat in agreement that they were involved in activities related to
Parenting. Epstein (1995) defined Parenting as the application of proper child-rearing
skills that promoted attention to the child's health and safety needs. This includes the
provision of adequate supervision, attention to discipline, the provision of a home
environment conducive to the school-aged child's academic achievement, establishment
of rules to guide the child in making responsible decisions and the provision of
punishment to promote age appropriate behaviors.

Frequency analysis of the dimension of Parenting was conducted. Each of the
four items recorded a mean above 3. Item 16, "I monitor what my child reads,"
recorded the highest mean with 3.81 and a standard deviation of 0.86. Almost two-thirds
of respondents, 64.7 percent of parents indicated that they "often" or "always" monitor
what their children read. Only 5.9 percent of the respondents answered "never" or
"hardly ever" to this item. Item 13, "I review and assist with homework" had a mean
score of 3.47 and a standard deviation of 1.08. Parents responded in the "often" and
"always" categories of Item 13 at a mean of 47.1 with 20.6 percent responding "never"
or "hardly ever." Item 12, "I check my child's book bag for homework and notices,"
recorded the lowest mean score at 3.06 and a standard deviation of 1.29. Item 12 had the
137
highest number of parent, 37.5 percent, responding "never" or "hardly ever" with 40.6
percent of parents responding "often" or "always." Item 14, "I read with my child" had
a mean score of 3.19 and a standard deviation of 1 .03. Parents responded to Item 14 at a
mean of 38.2 percent in the categories of "often" or "always" while 23.5 percent
responded "never" or "hardly ever."
The findings on Parenting in this study are important because after an analysis
using independent sample Mest, results showed a statistical significant (p = 0.004)
difference in scores for the dimension of Parenting in students receiving Level 3 and
students receiving Level 4 on the March 2008 eighth-grade mathematics standardized
test. Of the four school-related parenting practices addressed in this study, Parenting
was the only parenting practice that indicated any relevance to student achievement
level. More students who received Level 3 came from homes where parents described
their school-related parenting practice as Parenting. This is noteworthy as Parenting
accounted for 25 percent of the variance on student achievement levels at Level 3. The
school-related parenting practice of Parenting may have contributed to 25 percent
student passing rate at Level 3. Based on these statistics, without the school-related
parenting practice Parenting, the number of Level 3 scores could have been reduced by
25 percent. This information is also noteworthy because it is not certain, based on the
findings of this study, if the students who received Level 3 would have received a lower
level (Level 1 or Level 2) had it not been for the influence of their parents' school-
related parenting practice of Parenting. The converse result is also worth exploring
further. This research is inconclusive as to whether students who received Level 3 on
their 2008 mathematics eighth grade examination in this suburban Long Island middle
school would have received the higher passing level (Level 4) had it not been for the
influence of their parents' school-related parenting practice of Parenting.
Volunteering and Student Proficiency Level
Table 4.9 illustrates the frequency analysis of the dimensions of Volunteering.
Three of the four items recorded a mean above 3.0. Item 5, "I volunteer in after-school
programs," had the lowest mean with 2.24 and a standard deviation of 1.23. Only 14.7
percent of parents indicated that they "often" or "always" volunteer in after school
programs. The highest percentage of parents, 50 percent, responded "never" or "hardly
ever" to this item. Parents responded "often" or "always" 39.4 percent on Item 9, "I
accompany my child's class on field trips." Parents responded "often" or "always" 44.2
percent on Item 4, "I volunteer in my child's classroom." Parents responded "never" or
"hardly ever" at a rate of 35.3 percent to volunteering in their children's classrooms.
Item 6, "I help my child with homework" had the highest percentage of parents
indicating often or always at a rate of 47 percent. Only 1 1 percent of parents indicated
"never" or "hardly ever" to helping their children with homework assignment.
Okpala et al. (2001) in a study conducted in 8 high schools, 12 middle schools
and 50 elementary schools in an impoverished area of North Carolina, investigated the
relationships among time volunteered to help in school, school spending, and parents'
socio-economic status in predicting student achievement. The result of the study was
that volunteering in schools was not associated with student academic achievement.
This study concurs with the findings by Okpala et al. (2001). After an independent
sample /-test was conducted, Volunteering did not yield any statistical significance in
students who demonstrated proficiency at Level 4 over students who received Level 3
on the eighth-grade mathematics examination in a suburban Long Island middle school
139
(See Table 4.13). The findings of this study on the dimension of Volunteering
contradicted the conclusion of Gerald's (2007) and Bruno's (2006) findings that schools
that do encourage volunteering have higher rate of student achievement.
This study sought to examine the level of student involvement in their education
that may contribute to their academic proficiency level. Student involvement was
classified as student dispositions that were divided into three categories: Self-Concept,
Academic Self-Concept and Anger Control that were based on the works of Rusielewicz
(2005) and Maser (2007). Shavelson et al. (1976) also studied the relationship between
student Self-Concept and their academic achievement. Maser (2007) also concluded that
high Academic Self-Concept is associated with low problem behaviors. High problem
behaviors, which include behavior such as poor Anger Control, will result in low
student academic achievement. Though the students in this study were students who
were either proficient or demonstrated mastery, an inclusion of the student dispositions

was necessary to examine the relationship of Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept and
Anger Control in examining the effect that these dispositions had on students who
achieved proficiency (Level 3) rather than mastery (Level 4).
In this study, student dispositions of Self-Concept and Anger Control did not
have any statistically significant relationship with student achievement levels at either
Level 3 or Level 4 on the eighth-grade 2008 New York State mathematics examinations
with this group of eighth-grade students in a suburban Long Island middle school. The
finding was supported by Maser (2007) and Shavelson et al. (1976) that low Academic
Self-Concept and low Self-Concept were related with low student academic
achievement. The students in this study were high academic achieving students; not
surprisingly, there were no statistically significant relationships between their

achievement on mathematics and their Self-Concept and Academic Self-Concept. There
was no statistical difference between the self-Concept and Academic Self-Concept of
students performing at the proficiency level (Level 3) and students performing at the
mastery level (Level 4). There was a slight but not statistically significant relationship
between Anger Control and student academic achievement (See Table 4.13). This result
might have been different had there been more boys than the 1 1 who took part in this
study or if the number of boys and girls were reversed. A total of 34 students took part
in this study: 1 1 boys and 23 girls. Felson, et al. (1994) concluded that male students
who were frustrated academically were very likely to become resentful of schools.
Skiba and McKeIvey (2000) saw anger as one of the most devastating factors in student
academic achievement. All the students in this study were students who were realizing
academic success at proficient or mastery levels and therefore a lack of Anger Control
did not play a significant role in the achievement level of these students.
Academic Self-Concept was the only student disposition that showed any
positive correlation to student achievement in this study. Table 3.39 presented the
correlation findings between Learning at Home and Academic Self-Concept. Learning
at Home accounted for 13 percent of the variance on Academic Self-Concept.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are based on the findings and conclusions of

this study. The study was conducted on parents and their children who completed the
eighth-grade New York State mathematics examinations in March 2008.
1 . School administrators, counselors and social workers must place more
emphasis on educating parents about how to be more Authoritative in their
parental style so that proficient (Level 3) students can become mastery

(Level 4) students. This could be done through parent workshops.
2. School administrators and PTA/PTO should conduct workshops for parents
on the value of Learning at Home.
3. Schools administrators should place more emphasis on educating parents
about being involved in school-related activities, as a means of raising
student achievement levels, and provide parents with more resources to help
their children at home.
4. School administrators, PTA/PTO, local churches and local civic groups need
to educate parents about proper child-rearing skills that promote attention to
the child's health and safety needs including the provision of adequate
supervision, attention to discipline, the provision of a home environment
conducive to the school-aged child's academic achievement, establishment
of rules to guide the child in making responsible decisions and the provision
of punishment to promote age appropriate behaviors. The study showed

Parenting contributed to students achieving proficiency (Level 3) on eighthgrade mathematics examinations.
5. Schools administrators should conduct workshops for parents on the
curriculum being taught in schools. This will afford parents the ability to
assist their students with their school work at home by providing the parents
with a level of comfort in discussing with their children topics being taught
or giving parents some ability to assist students with their homework..

Recommendations for Further Research
1 . The study should be replicated and conducted with a larger parent and
142
Student sample to test the findings of this study when applied to a larger
group.
2. Items in surveys used in this study need to be restated in a more age

appropriate manner so as to ensure greater validity of the results.
3. The study should be conducted in a different setting or possibly with a
different academic subject.
4. The study should be conducted on two student groupings: students who
achieved Levels 1 and 2 in one group, and students who achieved Levels 3
and 4 in the other grouping.
5. The number of items in each survey dimension should be increased. No
fewer than six Items should be in any of the dimensions to provide for
greater validity.
6. The study should be conducted on a larger number of boys within the student
population.
7. The study should be conducted using an interview protocol with parents and
students that encompasses a case study of successful male African-American
students.
REFERENCES
American Psychological Association (2004). Controlling anger: Before it controls you.

Retrieved January, 10, 2008, from http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/anger.html.
Anderson, S. L. (1978). The aggressive child. Pediatric Development and Behavior.
Retrieved March 3, 2008 from http:www.dpeds.org/articles/article.cfm/name
=angry.
Baldwin, A. L. (1948). Socialization and the parent-child relationship. Child

Development, 19, 127-136.
Ballantine, J. (2001, January 1). Raising competent kids: The authoritative parenting
style, for parents particularly. Childhood Education, 78(\), 46-47. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. EJ643726) Retrieved November 30, 2007,
from ERIC database.
Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative control on child behavior. Child

Development, 37(4), 887-907.
Baumrind, D. (1972). An explanatory study of socialization effect on Black children:
Some Black-White comparisons. Child Development, 43, 261-267.
Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In W. Damon (Ed), Child
Development Today and Tomorrow (pp. 349-378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and
substance use. Journal ofEarly Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.
Baumrind, D. & Black, A. E. (1967). Socialization practices associated with dimensions
of competence in preschool boys and girls. Child Development, 38, 291-327.
Becker, W. C. (1994). Consequences of different kinds of parental discipline. In
Hoffman, M. L. & Hoffman, L. (Eds.), Review ofchild development (pp. 51-84).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Boveja, M. (1998, January 1). Parenting styles and adolescents' learning strategies in the
urban community. Journal ofMulticultural Counseling and Development, 26(2),
110. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ568350) Retrieved March
17, 2008, from ERIC database.
Bruno, R. (2006). Effective parent-school partnerships: A research report by parents
united for responsible education.
144
Calsyn, R. J., & Kenny, D. A. (1977). Self-concept of ability and perceived evaluation
of others: Cause or effect of academic achievement. Journal ofEducational
Psychology, 69(2), 136-145.
Carey, N., Farris, E., & Westat, Inc. (1996). Parent and schools: Partners in student
learning. (Office of Educational Research and Improvements, National Center
for Education No. 96-913). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Carey, N., Farris, E., & Westat, Inc. (1998). Parent involvement in children 's education:
Efforts by public elementary schools. (Office of Educational Research and
Improvement, National Center for Educational Statistics No. 98-032).
Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Chavkin, N. F., & Garza-Lubeck, M. (1990). Multicultural approaches to parent
involvement: Research and practice. Social Work in Education, /3(1), 22-34.
Chavkin, N. F., & Williams, D. L. (1985). Executive summary ofthefinal report:
Parent involvement in education project. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED266874).
Chavkin N. F., & Williams, D. L. (1987). Enhancing parent involvement: Guidelines for
access to an important resource for school administrators. Education and Urban
Society, 19(2), 164-184.
Corbire, M., & Mbekou, V. (1997). Academic interest questionnaire. Unpublished
document. Vancouver (BC), Canada: University of British Columbia.
Cutler III, W. W. (2000). Parents and schools: The 150-year strugglefor control in
American education. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model.
Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487-496.
Deming, Edward W. (1986). Out of the crisis. Massachusetts: Institute of Technology
Center for Advanced Engineering Study.
Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P., Roberts, D. F., & Faleigh, M. J. (1987).
The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child
Eccles, J. S. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence,
(Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco:
Frennan & Co.
145
Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or
marching band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of

Adolescent Research, 14{\), 10-43.
Englemann, S. (1999). The benefits of direct instruction: Affirmative action for at risk
students. Educational Leadership, 57(1), 77-79.
Epstein, J. L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships. Caring for the children we

share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 701-713.
Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family and community partnerships: Preparing educators

and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Epstein, J. L., Dauber, S. L. (1991). Schoolprograms and teacher practices ofparent

involvement in inner-city elementary and middle schools. The Elementary School
Journal, 91(3), 289-305.
Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K.C., Jansorn, N. R., & Van
Voorhis, F. L. (2002). School, family and community, partnerships: Your
handbookfor action, (2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Feindler, E. L., Marriot, S. A. & Iwata, M. (1984). Group anger control for junior high
school delinquents. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 5(3), 299-3 1 1 .
Felson, R. B., Liska, A. E., South, S. J., & McNulty, T. L. (1994). The subculture of
violence and delinquency: Individual vs. school context effects. Social Forces,
73, 155-173.
Finders, M. & Lewis, C. (1994). Why some parents don't come to school. Educational
Leadership, 57(8), 50-54.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational Research: An introduction.
(6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Gerald, I. (2007). Parent involvement and academic achievement: A case study of
school-related parenting practices, parental styles and achievement on the 4l

grade English language arts exam in school years 2004 and 2005. Doctoral
dissertation, Dowling College, 2007(Publication No. AAT 3317861).
Gestwicki, C. (1996). Home, school, and community relations: A guide to work with
parents (3). New York: Delmar.
Glover, D., & Law, S. (2004, September 1). Creating the right learning environment:
The application of models of culture to student perceptions of teaching and
learning in eleven secondary schools. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 15, 313. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ691570)
Retrieved July 9, 2008, from ERIC database.
146
Guay, F., Marsh, H. W. & Boivin, M. (2003). Academic self-concept and academic
achievement: Developmental perspectives on their casual ordering. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95(\), 124-136.
Haggard, L., & Williams, D. (1992). Identity affirmation through leisure activities:
Leisure symbols of the self. Journal ofLeisure Research, 24(1), 1-18.
Hall, W. N., & Bracken, B. A. (1996). Relationship between maternal parenting styles
and African American and White adolescents' interpersonal relationships. School

Psychology International, /7(3), 253-267.
Hamachek, D. (1995). Self-concept and school achievement: Intervention dynamics and

a tool for assessing the self-concept component. Journal ofCounseling &
Ho Sui-Chu, E., & Willms, J. D. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighthgrade achievement. Sociology ofEducation, 69(2), 126-141.
Huang, C, & Michael, W. B. (2000). A confirmatory factor analysis of scores on a

Chinese version of an academic self-concept scale and its variance across
groups. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 772-786.

Jacobs, J. E., Vernon, M. K., & Eccles, J. S. (2004). Relations between social selfperceptions, time use and prosocial or problem behaviors during adolescence.
Journal ofAdolescent Research, 19(1), 45-62.
Kovacs, M., & Devlin, B. (1998). Internalizing disorders in childhood. Journal ofChild
Psychology andpsychiatry, 39, 47-63.
Leithwood, K., Aitken, R., & Jantzi, D. (2001). Making schools smarter: A systemfor
monitoring school and districtprogress (2nd Ed). Retrieved from February 2009
from ERIC database.
Liu, X., & Kaplan, H. B. (1992). Decomposing the reciprocal relationships between
academic achievement and general self-esteem. Youth and Society, 24, 123-148.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family:
Parent-child interaction. In P. H. Museum (Series Ed.) and E. M. Hetherington
(Vol. Ed.), Handbook ofchildpsychology: Vol. 4. socialization, personality, and
social development (4) pp. 1-101). New York: Wiley.
Mackenzie, Donald E. (1983) "Research for School Improvement: An Appraisal of

Some Recent Trends." Educational Researcher 12(4).
Mannan, G. & Blackwell, J. (2001). Business involvement in the schools: How and
where do parents fit in the process? Education, 113(2), 286-293.
147
Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. (2004). Explaining paradoxical relations between academic
self-concepts and achievements: Cross-cultural generalizability of the
internal/external frame of reference predictions across 26 countries. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 96(1), 56-67.
Marsh, H. W. & O'Neil, R. (1984). Self Description Questionnaire III: The construct
validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of
Educational Measurement, 21(2), 153-174.
Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Koller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic
self-concept, interest, grades, and standardized test scores: Reciprocal effects
models of casual ordering. Child Development, 76(2), 397-416.
Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1997). Causal effects of academic self-concept on

academic achievement: Structural equation models of longitudinal data. Journal
ofEducational Psychology, 89(1), 41-54.
Maser, K. (2007). The level of student participation in extra-curricula activities,
adolescence development, and student achievement. (Doctoral dissertation,

Dowling College, 2007). .(Publication No. AAT 3272790).
McClum, L. A., & Merrell, K. W. (1998). Relationship ofperceived parenting styles,

locus of control orientation, and self-concept among junior high age students.
Psychology in the schools, 35(4), 381-390.
McLeod, J., Kruttschnitt, C. & Dornfeld, M. (1994). Does parenting explain the effects
of structural conditions on children's antisocial behavior? A comparison of

Blacks and Whites. Social Forces, 73(2), 575-604. Retrieved January 2008 from
ERIC database.
Menjares, P. C, Michael, W.B., & Rueda, R. (2000). The development and construct
validation of a Spanish version of an academic self-concept scale for middle
school Hispanic students from families of low socio-economic levels. Spanish
Journal ofPsychology, 60, 53-62.
Michael, W. B. & Smith, R. A. (1976). The development and preliminary validation of

three forms of a self-concept measure emphasizing school-related factors.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38, 527-535.

National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform. Retrieved November, 24, 2007 from the US
Department of Education web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/natatrisk/index.html.
National Center for Educational Statistics (2002) Percent of high school seniors
who participate in selected school-sponsored extracurricular activities, by

student characteristics: 1980 and 1992. Retrieved, December 10, 2007,
148
New York State Department of Education (2004). Overview ofschoolperformance in
English language arts, mathematics, and science and analysis ofstudent
subgroup performancefor Henry L. Stimpson Middle School. University ofthe

State of New York: Author.
Okpala, C. O., Okpala, A. O., & Smith, F. E. (2001). Parental involvement, instructional
expenditure , family socioeconomic attributes, and student achievement. The
Journal ofEducational Research, 95(2), 110-115.
Paik C. H., & Michael, W. B. (2000). The reliability and construct validity of scores on
the six-factor DOSC (Dimensions of Self-Concept) scale for college students.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 617-627.
Paik, C. M., & Michael, W. B. (2002). Further psychometric evaluation ofthe Japanese
version of an academic self-concept scale. Journal ofPsychology, 136, 298-306.
Perry-Burney, G. D., & Takyi, B. K. (2002). Self-esteem, academic achievement, and
moral development among adolescent girls. Journal ofHuman Behavior in the

Social Environment, 5(2), 15-25.
Pritchard, R., Morrow, D, & Marshall, J. (2005, June 1). School and district culture as
reflected in student voices and student achievement. School Effectiveness and
School Improvement, i(2),153. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
EJ691580) Retrieved July 9, 2008, from ERIC database.
Purkey, S. C, & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. The Elementary

'School Journal 83(A), All-52.
Querido, J. G., Warner, T. D., & Eyberg, S. M. (2002). Parenting styles and child
behavior in African-American families ofpreschool children. Journal ofClinical

Child & Adolescent Psychology, 31(2), 272-277.
Reich, C. A. (1991). Perceived parental closeness and control in relation to adolescent
' general expectancy for success in life and school achievement. Master's thesis,
University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland. Umi #
Rodkin, P. C, Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of
popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental

Psychology, 36(1), 14-24.
Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and school: Using social, economic, and educational reform
to close the Black-White achievement gap. Washington, DC: Economic Policy
Institute.
Rusielewicz, R. E. (2005). A quasi-experimental study of social skill development

for students at risk for academic failure in a suburban high school. Doctoral
dissertation, Dowling College, 2005. (Publication No. AAT 3182585).
149
Schaefer, E. S. (1959). A circumplex model for matemal behavior. Journal ofAbnormal

and Social Psychology, 59, 226-235.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist,

25(3/4), 299. Retrieved April 14, 2008, from Academic Search Elite database.
Schiefele, U., & Csikszentmihaiyi, M. (1994). Interest and the quality of experience in
classrooms. European Journal of'Psychology ofEducation, 9, 251-270.
Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. (1982). Self-concept: The interplay of theory and
methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 3-17.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of

construct interpretations. Review ofEducational Research, 46, 407-^41.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Hagtvet, K. A. (1990). Academic achievement and self-concept: An

analysis of casual predominance in a developmental perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 58(2), 292-307.
Shek, Daniel T. L. (1998). Adolescents' perceptions ofpaternal and maternal parenting

styles in Chinese context. Journal ofPsychology, 132(5), 527-537.
Skiba, R., & Mckelvey, J. (2000). Anger management: What works in preventing school
' violence. Safe and Responsible School Project. U.S. Department ofEducation
Office of Special Education Programs.
Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D., & Mounts, N. S. (1986). Authoritative parenting promotes
adolescent school achievement and attendance. National Center on Effective
Secondary Schools. Washington, D.C.
Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D., & Mounts, N. S. (1989). Authoritative parenting,

psychosocial maturity, and academic success among adolescents. Child
Development 60, 1425-1436.
Swap, S. M. (1987). Enhancingparent involvement in schools. New York: Teachers

College Press.
Symonds, P. M. (1939). The psychology ofparent-child relationships. New York:

Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Tamaki, S. (1994). Adolescent anger control. SSTA Research Centre Report (# 94-06).
U.S. Department of Education (2001). No child left behind act. Retrieved on January,
11, 2008, from http:www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/index.html.
150
U.S. Department of Education (2003). The condition of education 2003. (NCES 2003067). Washington, DC: Author.
Villar, I. ?., Michael, W. B., & Gribbons, B. (1995). The development and construct
validation of a Portuguese version of an academic self-concept scale.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 1 1 5- 1 23 .
Unkenholz, C. L. (2007). Parent perceptions ofparental involvement and its
relationship to student achievement in minority and non-minority families living

in and not living in poverty. Doctoral dissertation, Dowling College, 2007.
(Publication No. AAT 3272896).
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1994). Children's competence beliefs, achievement values,
and general self-esteem. Change across elementary and middle school. Journal
ofEarly Adolescence, 14, 107-138.
Zinsmeister, K. (1996). Family meltdown in the classroom. American Enterprise, 7
(50),' 42-45.
151
APPENDIX A
PARENT PEPvMISSION TO CONDUCT STUDENT SURVEY

Dear Parent/Guardian,
I am a doctoral student at Dowling College and the assistant principal at the

intermediate school. As a member of the ninth grade class of students here at
____________________ who took the New York State English Language Arts and
mathematics examinations last year, your child has been selected to participate in a
research project. The project is being conducted by me as a partial fulfillment of the

doctoral program at Dowling College with the cooperation of
_____________________ High School. The project will survey students using
twenty four questions on students' dispositions of self-concept, academic self-concept,
and anger control. It will also survey parents on their parental styles and parenting
practices.
The purpose of the research study, in addition to being a part of my doctoral

requirement at Dowling College, is to examine the relationship among self-concept,
academic self-concept, anger control and how these in conjunction with parental styles,
and parenting practices (based on a parents' survey questionnaire) help to predict
students' level of academic achievement. The utmost confidentiality will be adhered to
in this study. Students, parents and the school's name will not be printed or published
and will only be known by me, the principal researcher, and my Dowling College
advisor during and after the surveys have been completed.
Affixed is a copy of the students' survey with the student assent form explaining the
research procedures, benefits and risk factors; and the parents' survey which will both
be analyzed together in conjunction with students' scores on the grade eight ELA and
mathematics, derived from the school's data base. Please be assured that your and your
child's participation is entirely voluntary. If you decide to participate in this survey,

please complete the parents' survey which will take you about twenty-five minutes.
Please also sign the attached permission slip that will allow me to ask you child to be a
part ofthis survey. Please return the completed parents' survey along with the signed
permission slip as soon as possible in the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope.
Should you have any questions, you may contact the principal researcher at (631) 871-
8253 or via email at map4(a).dowling.edu; or you may call the Dowling College advisor,
Dr. Robert Manley at (631) 244-3000 or via email at manleyr@dowling.edu; or if you
have questions concerning your rights as a subject, you may contact the chair ofthe
Institutional Review Board, Dr. Maura Pilotti at (631) 244-5012 or via email at
pilottim(5).dowling.edu.
152
After the completion of the surveys, after December 31, 2008, participants who are
desirous of obtaining results of the survey should contact me via email at
map4@dowling.edu.
A second copy ofthis consent form has been included for you to keep. Thanks for your
cooperation in this project.
Sincerely,
Mark A. Pitterson
Assistant Principal
Principal Researcher
,the parent or guardian of

(Parent Name)
.................................................... grant permission for
(Student Name)
............................................... to participate in the study on self-concept.

(Student Name)
Academic self-concept and anger control.
(Parent Signature)
(Date)
153
APPENDIX B
STUDENT ASSENT FORM FOR STUDY PARTICIPATION
Project Title- A STUDY OF PARENTAL STYLES, PARENTING PRACTICES,
STUDENT SELF-CONCEPT, ACADEMIC SELF-CONCEPT, ANGER CONTROL
AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN A SUBURBAN MIDDLE SCHOOL

Investigator: Mark Pitterson
Assistant Principal
You are being asked to be a volunteer in a research study. The purpose ofthis research
is to investigate relationship among parental styles, parenting practices, students'
dispositions of self-concept, academic self-concept, anger control, and student's
academic achievement: based on the New York State grade eight ELA and mathematics
scores. This study is being done as part of the researcher's Dowling College's
dissertation requirement.
Procedure: If you decide to participate in this study, you will be asked to complete a
short survey consisting oftwenty-four questions, which should take you approximately
ten minutes to complete.
Benefits: There are no immediate benefits to you for being in this research study. The
benefit ofbeing in this study is that you will be assist by helping the researcher examine
how parental styles, parents' school related parenting practices, self-concept, academic
self-concept, and anger control may predict students' academic achievement.
Risk Factor: There is no risk associated with being in this study.
Confidentiality: No name or identifying information should be written on the
questionnaire. Any information that you provide, including your name on this consent
form, will not be revealed in any report on the results obtained from the study.
Participants will be assigned numerical codes which will be stored in an unidentified
electronic password protected format. Only the researcher will have access to this
information which will be destroyed within five years or subsequent to the publication
of the research findings.
You do not have to be in this study if you don't want to be.
You have the right to decline the completion ofthe survey at anytime without
giving any reason and without any penalty.
If you have any question about the research study or the questionnaire, you may
contact the researcher, Mark Pitterson at (63 1) 871-8253 or at
map4@,dowling.edu.
If you have any question about your rights as a research volunteer, you may
contact Dr. Robert Manley, research advisor, at Dowling College (631) 2443000 or manlevr(a),dowring.edu; or the chair of the Institutional Review Board
154
Dr. Maura Pilotti at (631) 244-5012 or at pilottim(5),dowling.edu.
Any new information that may make you change your mind about being in this
study will be given to you.
You will get a copy of this consent form to keep.
If you sign below, it means that you have read (or have had read to you) and
understand all ofthe information given in this assent form, and you would like to
be a volunteer in this study.
Student's Name (Print)
I understand that I do not have to participate even if my parents gave me permission to
do so. My refusal to participate will not result in any penalty including loss of grade. I
have read and understand the above statement and hereby agree to participate in the
study outlined.
Student's Signature
Mark A. Pitterson, Research Investigator
Date
Date
155
APPENDIX C
REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SURVEY

May 12, 2008
Dr
Superintendent of Schools
.................. , New York
Dear Dr
Permission to Conduct Educational Research
I am a doctoral candidate at Dowling College's School of Education, in the Department

of Educational Administration, Leadership and Technology. I am conducting research to
examine the relationship of Parental Styles, school related Parenting Practices; students'
dispositions of Self-concept, Academic Self-concept, and Anger Control on Student
Academic Achievement. I am requesting permission to conduct a survey with the
current ninth grade students who took the New York State's English Language Arts and
mathematics examinations during the 2007 to 2008 school year.
In addition to the ninth grade students, I am also requesting authorization to survey the
parents of the students in the target group.
I have enclosed a copy of both the students' and parents' survey instruments for your
review and the cover letter to parents. All identities of students, parents, and the
institution will remain confidential and no names will be published in my dissertation. A
copy of the information gathered will be made available to you upon the completion of
the dissertation.
Your expeditious and favorable response to this matter is greatly appreciated.

Respectfully yours,
Mark Anthony Pitterson
APPENDIX D
PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SURVEY
May 14, 2008
Mr. Mark Pitterson
21 Golf Club Circle
Manorvtlle, NY 1.1949
Deaf Mr. Pitterson:
I have reviewed the parent and student survey instruments that you wish to administer to
^^l parents and students as part ofyour dissertation research at Bowling

College. You and I have discussed these questions, including how they might be
perceived by respondents.
You have my permission to administer these survey instruments based on my
understanding that participation is voluntary and consent must be obtained from intended
respondents. Please feel free to copy this letter fortransmittal to supervising college
authorities.
Good luck with your research, I hope the results will better inform interaction among
professional educators, parents and students to the benefit ofunderstanding and

promoting student success.
Sincerely,
Superintendent ofSchools
APPENDIX E
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL
DOWLING COLLEGE
institutional Review Board
To:
Mark Pitterson
From:
Dr. Maura Pilottt
Contact info :
PiiotKm@DowiifiQ.edu or 63 1 -244-50 1 2
Date:
June 3, 2008
Re:
Review of Human Subject Research
Protocolf:
11-08
Project's Title:
A STUDY OF PARENTAL STYLES, PARENTING PRACTICES,
STUDENT SELF-CONCEPT, ACADEMIC SELF-CONCEPT, ANGER CONTROL AND

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN A SUBURBAN MIDDLE SCHOOL
The Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects of
Dowling College has approved your project with the following provisions:
a
This approval is for one year, starting 6/4/08 and ending 6/3/09. if you
wish to conduct research beyond this period of time, you'll need to fill out the IRB
Continuing Research Progress Report form;, it is your responsibility to ensure

that you have an approved protoco! at all times during your research.
b
If required by the IRB, approved consent form(s) must be used by ail
subjects. You are responsible for maintaining signed consent form(s) for a
period of at least three years.
c
All modifications and/or changes to the approved protocol most be
reviewed and approved by the IRB prior to implementation.
d
All adverse events as a result of this research must be reported to the IRB
at the time of occurrence.
e
AiI principal investigators and other key research personnel have on file
Witti the IRB their Computer-Based Training (CBT) Certificates (i.e., IRB
Course Completion Certificates]!.
Good luck with your work!
yU***'ftk
!RB Chair
158
APPENDIX F
PARENT SURVEY
For questions one and two, please select one response.

1 . What is your ethnicity?
a. White
b. Black
c. Hispanic
d. Asian
e. Pacific Islander
f. Native American
2. Gender:
Male
Female
For each question below, circle the number to the right that best fits your level of
participation on the issue. Use the scale at the top of the questionnaire to match
your opinion.
N = Never H/E = Hardly Ever S = Sometimes O = Often A = Always
Scale of Frequency
Questions
H/E
3. I attend PTA meeting.
4. I volunteer in my child's classroom.
5. I volunteer in after school programs.
6. I help my child with homework.
7. I attend night performances, programs, or
8. I participate in parent/teacher conferences.
9. I accompany my child's class on field trips.
10. I participate in school fundraisers.
1 1 . I play formal education games at home with
assemblies.
my child.
12. I check my child's book bag for homework

and notices.
159
N = Never ?/? = Hardly Ever S = Sometimes O = Often A = Always

Questions
Scale of frequency
H/E
13. I review and assist with homework.
14. I read with my child.
15. I take my child to the library.
16. I monitor what my child reads.

17. My child and I participate in school-related
activities.
1 8. My child and I talk about school.

19.1 involve my child in religious-based
educational activities.
20. I teach my child to embrace the American

Dream; that is, he/she defines success in life as
possessing social status, and earning a good
living.
21. I offer my child little or no help with school
homework, even if asked because the homework
is not that important and is really up to the child
to complete.
22. I often provoke or encourage oppositional
behavior from my child by such methods as
playing games, teasing, and challenging my child
to express his questions about my scope of
authority.
23. I have a clear, well-developed image of the
kind of person I want my child to become in
terms of personal characteristics.
24. My idea of what my rights and duties are as
a parent cannot be explained or defined.
25. When my child does not do what I wish, I
remain reasonable and explore the problem
further with my child before expecting or
insisting on obedience.
160
For questions 26 through 48 select the response that best describes the level of
activity. SD = Strongly Disagree D = Disagree SW/A = Somewhat Agree
A = Agree SA = Strongly Agree
Scale of Activities
Questions
SW/A
SA
29. In childrearing, I do not believe that one person

should exercise power over another.
30. I openly disregard or reject my child's question
33. I always welcome my child's bid for closeness

with a great deal of personal attention and
34. I allow my child the physical freedom to
45
26. My child's day-to-day activities are structured

by my daily regimen and adhered to with only rare
SD
exceptions.
27. I am confident that I radiate self-confidence in
all that I say and do in my relationship with my

28. When my child runs a risk of hurting himself, I
exaggerate the seriousness of the injury and try to
frighten my child into avoiding similar situations in
the future.
when I am directing or criticizing him/her

31.1 value a well-structured regiment for the entire
household.
32. 1 make consistent efforts to see that high degree

of structure is maintained.
explore his environment away from me.

35. My child is allowed to visit freely with friends
in the neighborhood.
36. My child is allowed to remain after school in

the playground if he/she wants to.
37. My child has one or more tasks to perform

which he/she does regularly without choice.
38 I set regular tasks as a conscious part of my
childrearing policy because I value my child's work

39. I believe in setting tasks to raise my child's level
of competence.
40. I prefer to let my child select his/her own

reading material.
161
SD = Strongly Disagree
SA = Strongly Agree
D = Disagree SW/A = Somewhat Agree A = Agree

Scale of Activity
Questions
41 . I prefer to let my child watch what he/she wants

to on television on the principle that my child should
SD
SW/A
SA
12
12
12
12
12
12
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
12
12
choose his/her own intellectual content.
42. I do not believe that my child should have to

put his toys away and clean up his/her own mess.
43. I willingly clean up after my child and I do not
insist that he/she helps.
44. I listen and am responsive to my child's critical
comments about me or another adult (e.g., teacher).
45. I encourage critical comments from my child.
46. I am seeking to develop my child's verbal and
reasoning abilities
47. I consistently engage my child in intellectually
meaningful discussions.
48. I help my child with homework.
162
APPENDIX G
STUDENT SURVEY
Please circle the correct response in the box below.

Gender
Male
Female
For each question below, circle the number to the right that best fits your
opinion on the importance of the issue. Use the scale above to match you opinion.
N = Never
H/E = Hardly Ever S = Sometimes O = Often A = Always

Scale of Importance
Items
H/E
OA
1. I often feel like I might lose control of my

anger.
2. I learn quickly in most academic subjects.
3. I take out my anger unfairly on others.
4. I don't mind having a confrontation with school

personnel.
5. I pick up concepts very slowly in the classroom.
6. I easily get really mad.
7. I don't have much
11.1 lack self-confidence.
12. I get easily annoyed.
respect for myself.
8. I have very negative feelings about myself.

9. I have lots of friends that respect me very much.
1 0. I yell at others when I get angry.
13. I am never creative when given an assignment.

14. I don't do things that are important.
163
N = Never
?/? = Hardly Ever S = Sometimes O = Often A = Always

Scale of Importance
Items
H/E
SOA
15. 1 have trouble with most academic subjects.

16. I am never in a good mood.
17. I am not at all accepting of myself.
18. I am willing to have a physical fight to prove
I'm right.
19. I get bad marks in most academic subjects.
20. I have very good self- esteem.
21 . I hate most academic subjects.
22. I am always prepared for my classes.
23. I easily become so upset that I have to hit
something.
24. I enjoy doing work for most academic subjects.
164
APPENDIX H
SURVEY DATA
Frequency Table Item Analysis for Permissive Q. 1

q21P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
3.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
Valid Percent
85.3
29
3
80.6
8.3
1
1
2.8
2.8
2.9
34
94.4
100.0
2
36
5.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
85.3
94.1
97.1
100.0
q35P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
8.3
3.00
4.00
9
14
13.9
25.0
14.7
26.5
38.9
5.00
3
34
8.3
94.4
41.2
8.8
2
36
5.6
100.0
Total
Missing
Valid Percent
System
Total
Cumulative
Percent
8.8
23.5
50.0
91.2
100.0
100.0
q40P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
1.00
Valid Percent
2.00
3.00
1
2
2.8
5.6
2.9
5.9
11
30.6
32.4
4.00
13
5.00
Total
7
34
36.1
19.4
38.2
20.6
94.4
100.0
System
2
36
5.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
8.8
41.2
79.4
100.0
165
q41P
Percent
1.00
16.7
Valid Percent
18.2
2.00
13
13
36.1
36.1
39.4
39.4
2.8
Total
33
System
3
36
91.7
8.3
3.0
100.0
Frequency
Valid
3.00
4.00
Missing
Total
Cumulative
Percent
18.2
57.6
97.0
100.0
100.0
q42P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
1.00
23
2.00
4.00
Total
34
2
System
Total
36
63.9
25.0
Valid Percent
67.6
26.5
5.6
94.4
5.9
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
67.6
94.1
100.0
5.6
100.0
q43P
50.0
Valid Percent
52.9
Cumulative
Percent
52.9
33.3
8.3
35.3
8.8
88.2
97.1
2.8
2.9
100.0
100.0
94.4
5.6
36
100.0
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
18
12
3.00
3
1
5.00
Total
Missing
Total
System
34
166
Frequency Table Item Analysis for Authoritative Q. 1

q22P
Valid
Missing
66.7
16.7
Valid Percent
70.6
17.6
Cumulative
Percent
70.6
88.2
2.8
2.9
91.2
5.6
2.8
5.9
2.9
97.1
100.0
100.0
Percent
Frequency
1.00
24
2.00
3.00
6
1
4.00
5.00
Total
1
34
94.4
System
2
36
5.6
100.0
Total
q26P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
12
5.6
33.3
6.1
36.4
15
1
41.7
2.8
45.5
3.0
8.3
91.7
9.1
100.0
33
3
System
Total
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Percent
36
6.1
42.4
87.9
90.9
100.0
8.3
100.0
q37P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.8
2.9
2
15
5.6
41.7
5.9
44.1
11
30.6
32.4
85.3
5
34
13.9
94.4
14.7
100.0
100.0
5.00
Total
Total
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
8.8
2.00
3.00
4.00
Missing
Valid Percent
System
5.6
36
100.0
52.9
167
q38P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
5.6
3.00
19
8
52.8
22.2
13.9
34
2
94.4
5.6
36
100.0
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
Valid Percent
System
Total
5.9
55.9
23.5
14.7
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
5.9
61.8
85.3
100.0
q44P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
8.3
22.2
23.5
32.4
16
44.4
47.1
7
34
19.4
94.4
20.6
100.0
79.4
100.0
5.6
100.0
36
q45P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
Total
System
6
16
16.7
44.4
16.7
13.9
5
33
3
36
91.7
8.3
100.0
Valid Percent
18.2
Cumulative
Percent
18.2
48.5
18.2
66.7
84.8
15.2
100.0
100.0
168
Frequency Table Item analysis for Authoritarian Q. 1

q20P
Valid
1.00
2
4
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
6.1
Cumulative
Percent
6.1
12.1
18.2
Valid Percent
Percent
Frequency
5.6
11.1
8.3
8
16
22.2
44.4
9.1
24.2
27.3
51.5
48.5
100.0
33
91.7
100.0
3
36
8.3
100.0
q23P
3
8
2.8
8.3
2.9
8.8
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
11.8
22.2
23.5
35.3
22
61.1
94.4
5.6
64.7
100.0
100.0
34
2
36
100.0
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
Valid Percent
q27P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Valid Percent
1.00
2.8
2.9
2.00
2
4
5.6
11.1
5.9
11.8
3.00
4.00
19
52.8
55.9
5.00
Total
34
2
22.2
94.4
23.5
100.0
System
36
5.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
8.8
20.6
76.5
100.0
169
q31P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
5.6
3.00
4.00
14
38.9
33.3
12
6
5.00
Total
Missing
Valid Percent
System
Total
5.9
41.2
35.3
16.7
34
94.4
2
36
5.6
100.0
17.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
5.9
47.1
82.4
100.0
q32P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
13.9
5
12
33.3
11
6
30.6
16.7
34
2
94.4
5.6
36
100.0
Valid Percent
14.7
35.3
32.4
17.6
Cumulative
Percent
14.7
50.0
82.4
100.0
100.0
Frequency Table Item Analysis for Parenting Q. 2

ql2P
Percent
1.00
11.1
Valid Percent
12.5
2.00
3.00
22.2
19.4
25.0
21.9
Frequency
Valid
4.00
Missing
Total
22.2
25.0
5.00
13.9
Total
32
4
88.9
11.1
15.6
100.0
36
100.0
System
Cumulative
Percent
12.5
37.5
59.4
84.4
100.0
170
ql3P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
19.4
30.6
25.0
19.4
7
34
Total
Missing
7
11
System
Total
36
94.4
Valid Percent
20.6
32.4
26.5
20.6
Cumulative
Percent
20.6
52.9
79.4
100.0
100.0
5.6
100.0
ql4P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
1.00
Valid Percent
1
7
2.00
3.00
13
4.00
5.00
8
5
Total
34
2
System
Total
36
2.8
2.9
19.4
20.6
38.2
36.1
22.2
13.9
94.4
23.5
14.7
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
23.5
61.8
85.3
100.0
100.0
5.6
100.0
ql6P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
10
15
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
Total
System
Valid Percent
7
34
2
36
5.9
5.6
27.8
29.4
41.7
19.4
44.1
20.6
94.4
100.0
5.6
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
5.9
35.3
79.4
100.0
171
Frequency Table Item Analysis for Volunteering Q. 2

q4P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
6
6
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
16.7
16.7
Valid Percent
17.6
17.6
Cumulative
Percent
17.6
35.3
19.4
20.6
55.9
11
4
30.6
11.1
32.4
11.8
88.2
100.0
34
94.4
100.0
2
36
5.6
100.0
q5P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
14
3
38.9
8.3
3.00
12
4
33.3
11.1
1
34
2.8
94.4
5.6
36
100.0
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
Valid Percent
41.2
Cumulative
Percent
41.2
8.8
35.3
50.0
85.3
11.8
97.1
2.9
100.0
100.0
q6P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
11.1
14
38.9
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
Total
System
22.2
22.2
34
94.4
2
36
5.6
100.0
Valid Percent
11.8
Cumulative
Percent
11.8
41.2
23.5
52.9
76.5
23.5
100.0
100.0
172
q9P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
15.2
6.1
1.00
13.9
2.00
3.00
2
13
5.6
36.1
4.00
10
5.00
Total
3
33
27.8
8.3
30.3
9.1
91.7
100.0
System
3
36
Total
39.4
Cumulative
Percent
15.2
21.2
60.6
90.9
100.0
8.3
100.0
Frequency Table Item Analysis for Learning at Home Q2

qllP
5.6
5.9
Cumulative
Percent
5.9
16
44.4
11
5
30.6
13.9
47.1
32.4
52.9
85.3
14.7
100.0
34
94.4
5.6
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
Total
Missing
System
2
36
Total
Valid Percent
100.0
100.0
ql5P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
Total
System
16.7
11
30.6
8
9
22.2
25.0
34
2
94.4
5.6
36
100.0
Valid Percent
17.6
Cumulative
Percent
17.6
32.4
23.5
50.0
73.5
26.5
100.0
100.0
173
q39P
1.00
2.00
2.8
2.9
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
3.00
4.00
11
15
2.8
30.6
2.9
32.4
5.9
38.2
41.7
44.1
82.4
100.0
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
5.00
16.7
17.6
Total
34
2
94.4
5.6
100.0
36
100.0
System
Total
q46P
Valid
Missing
2.00
3.00
1
6
4.00
14
5.00
Total
12
33
System
3
36
Total
2.8
3.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.0
16.7
18.2
21.2
38.9
33.3
42.4
36.4
63.6
100.0
91.7
8.3
100.0
Percent
Frequency
Valid Percent
100.0
q47P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
3.00
19.4
4.00
16
11
44.4
30.6
34
94.4
2
36
5.6
100.0
5.00
Total
Missing
Total
System
Valid Percent
20.6
47.1
Cumulative
Percent
20.6
67.6
32.4
100.0
100.0
174
q48P
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Percent
2
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
5.9
52.9
2.00
3.00
16
5.6
44.4
5.9
47.1
4.00
25.0
26.5
79.4
5.00
Total
7
34
19.4
94.4
20.6
100.0
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
Frequency Table Item Analysis for School Participation Q. 2

q7P
2.00
2.8
2.9
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
3.00
2.8
2.9
5.9
4.00
5.00
10
22
27.8
61.1
29.4
64.7
35.3
100.0
Total
34
2
94.4
5.6
100.0
36
100.0
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
System
Total
Valid Percent
q8P
1.00
2.8
2.9
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
2.00
2.8
2.9
5.9
3.00
4.00
3
6
8.3
16.7
8.8
17.6
14.7
32.4
5.00
23
63.9
34
2
94.4
5.6
67.6
100.0
100.0
Total
36
100.0
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
System
Valid Percent
175
qlOP
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
1
1
2.8
2.8
2.9
3.00
12
12
33.3
33.3
35.3
35.3
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
Valid Percent
System
Total
2.9
22.2
23.5
34
2
94.4
5.6
100.0
36
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
2.9
5.9
41.2
76.5
100.0
ql7P
Percent
Frequency
Valid
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Total
Missing
System
Total
Valid Percent
2.8
3.0
12
14
33.3
38.9
36.4
42.4
6
33
16.7
91.7
18.2
100.0
8.3
36
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
3.0
39.4
81.8
100.0
ql8P
Percent
4.00
5.00
9
25
25.0
69.4
Valid Percent
26.5
73.5
Total
34
94.4
100.0
System
2
36
5.6
100.0
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Cumulative
Percent
26.5
100.0
176
Frequency Tables Item Analysis for Self-Concept Q. 3

q7
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
27
75.0
79.4
79.4
2.00
16.7
17.6
97.1
100.0
3.00
2.8
2.9
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
q8
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Percent
22
61.1
64.7
2.00
22.2
23.5
88.2
3.00
11.1
11.8
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
1.00
System
Total
64.7
qll
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
19
52.8
55.9
55.9
2.00
19.4
20.6
76.5
3.00
16.7
17.6
94.1
4.00
5.6
5.9
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
System
Total
5.6
36
100.0
ql4
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
26
72.2
76.5
76.5
2.00
16.7
17.6
94.1
100.0
3.00
5.6
5.9
Total
34
94.4
100.0
System
5.6
36
100.0
177
ql6
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
17
47.2
50.0
50.0
2.00
16
44.4
47.1
97.1
100.0
3.00
2.8
2.9
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
ql7
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
27
75.0
79.4
79.4
2.00
16.7
17.6
97.1
100.0
3.00
2.8
2.9
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
Frequency Tables Item Analysis for Academic Self-Concept Q. 3

ql5
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
22
61.1
64.7
64.7
2.00
25.0
26.5
91.2
3.00
5.6
5.9
97.1
4.00
2.8
2.9
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
178
ql9
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
22
61.1
64.7
64.7
2.00
22.2
23.5
88.2
100.0
3.00
11.1
11.8
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
q21
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
12
33.3
35.3
35.3
2.00
13
36.1
38.2
73.5
3.00
19.4
20.6
94.1
4.00
2.8
2.9
97.1
5.00
2.8
2.9
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
Frequency Tables Item Analysis for Anger Control Q. 3

ql
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
17
47.2
50.0
2.00
12
33.3
35.3
85.3
3.00
11.1
11.8
97.1
5.00
2.8
2.9
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
50.0
179
q3
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
17
47.2
50.0
50.0
2.00
12
33.3
35.3
85.3
3.00
11.1
11.8
97.1
100.0
1.00
4.00
2.8
2.9
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System
Total
q6
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Cumulative Percent
1.00
17
47.2
51.5
51.5
2.00
25.0
27.3
78.8
3.00
16.7
18.2
97.0
100.0
4.00
Total
Missing
Valid Percent
System
Total
2.8
3.0
33
91.7
100.0
8.3
36
100.0
qlO
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
1.00
14
38.9
41.2
41.2
2.00
11
30.6
32.4
73.5
3.00
22.2
23.5
97.1
4.00
2.8
2.9
100.0
Total
34
94.4
100.0
System
5.6
36
100.0
180
ql8
Percent
Frequency
Valid
1.00
2.00
27
75.0
3.00
4.00
5.00
8.3
5.6
2.8
1
34
2.8
94.4
5.6
36
100.0
Total
Missing
Valid Percent
System
Total
Cumulative
Percent
79.4
8.8
5.9
79.4
88.2
94.1
2.9
2.9
97.1
100.0
100.0
q23
Percent
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Total
Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
24
66.7
70.6
70.6
2.00
16.7
17.6
88.2
3.00
8.3
8.8
97.1
100.0
1.00
5.00
2.8
2.9
Total
34
94.4
100.0
5.6
36
100.0
System

Case Study

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Case Study

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

A CASE STUDY OF PARENTAL STYLES, PARENTING PRACTICES, STUDENT

SELF-CONCEPT, ACADEMIC SELF-CONCEPT, ANGER CONTROL, AND

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

UMI Number: 3428923

All rights reserved

Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC.

789 East Eisenhower Parkway

Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346

This Dissertation Submitted by Mark Pitterson

For the Degree of Doctor of Education

Robert J. Manley, Ph.D

Elsa-Sofia Morte, Ed.D.

Roberta Gerold, Ed.D.

Stephanie Tatum, Ph.D.

Richard Bernato, Ed.D.

eighth-grade mathematics examination in March 2008 in a suburban Long Island middle

Authoritarian and Non-Coercive based on the work of Gerald. Students' dispositions

Parents identified their school related parenting practices in descending order as

This study is dedicated to all the members of my family: To my grandmother,

Purpose of the Study

Statement of the Problem

Research Question One

Research Question Two

Research Question Three

Research Question Four

Research Question Five

Permissive Parental Styles

Authoritarian Parental Styles

Authoritative Parental Styles

Limitations of the Study

CHAPTER II- REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH

An Explanation of Parental Styles

School-Related Parenting Practices

Summary of Research Literature

Research Question Six

CHAPTER III - RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Data Gathering Techniques

Survey Questionnaire One

Instrument or Survey Questionnaire Two

Data Collection Procedures

CHAPTER IV - DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Research Question One

Research Question Two

Research Question Three

Research Question Four

Research Question Five

Research Question Six

CHAPTERV- SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations for Further Research

APPENDIX A - PARENT PERMISSION TO CONDUCT STUDENT SURVEY

APPENDIX B - STUDENT ASSENT FORM FOR STUDY PARTICIPATION

APPENDIX C - REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SURVEY

APPENDIX D - PERMISSION TO CONDUCT SURVEY

APPENDIX E - INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL

APPENDIX F - PARENT SURVEY

APPENDIX G - STUDENT SURVEY

APPENDIX H - SURVEY DATA

Components Matrix for Parents' Questionnaire

Deleted Items from Parent Survey Instrument

Components Matrix of Students' Questionnaire

Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition:

Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition: Academic

Varimax Rotated Factor Loading, Students' Disposition: Anger